User talk:Swarm/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

adoption???

hello, im new to wikipedia. i have had some help with my editing so far, and could use some more. Any chance?? Thanks. NHCLS (talk) 09:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Swarm. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 06:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Jasper Deng (talk) 06:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

RfA: thank you for your support

Thank you for your kind words and support during my RfA, Swarm. It meant a great deal coming from an experienced editor such as yourself. Regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:05, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

RFA

I replied back to your comment in my RFA, I been ignoring it for the most part, and not caring, but I felt I had to reply here in a proper fashion. Thanks Secret ^account 04:32, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE February 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors February 2013 events newsletter We are preparing to start our February requests blitz and March backlog elimination drive. The February 2013 newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the February blitz and March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup

Hello, Swarm. You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE news: February 2013

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2013 wrap-up Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, BDD and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:40, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-March 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter We are halfway through our March backlog elimination drive. The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Help Request

Hi Swarm. I got your name on the Adopters page. I'm a new editor and you offered to help in any way at all. That's why I'm contacting you. I signed up with Wikipedia because a particular page (titled "BDSM") has some inaccurate, original research information on it related to the etymology of the term. I would like to replace those inaccuracies with sourced, verifiable information.

I began by reading up on Wikipedia editing procedure. Next, I marked original research passages as citation needed and opened a discussion on the BDSM Talk page titled "Etymology". There, I have been in discussions about editing the Etymology references and section on the BDSM page. Two other editors have joined in that discussion. It seems to be a difficult process to develop a consensus. The folk etymology is well seated in the minds of some people. Even though I have found dictionary references that correct the folk etymology it seems difficult for some people to accept that.

I have made some progress, however. One editor agreed that the existing passages are in need of citation. There has been agreement on some points. But a full and complete consensus seems to elude me.

I know that the Verifiability page suggests removing unsourced material quickly and immediately but I do not want to start a flame war or appear to be overstepping. By contrast, I noticed today that some people have removed the citation needed tags from some of the passages in need of citation, even though we have a discussion going on the Talk page. So, other people do not seem to be as sensitive to creating a consensus or to replacing original research with verifiable citation as I am. Some of those people - from their pages, it seems like the only thing they have ever done (and/or one of the few things they have done) is remove the citation needed tags I placed on some of the original research passages.

Of course, I could revert them and restore the citation needed tags, but is that a good thing to do at this point? Not achieving a perfect consensus, do I allow original research to stand or do I replace it even though there is not a consensus?

Your guidance will be very much appreciated. :) SailinStuff (talk) 03:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi SailinStuff, I'm not a quarter as good in such things as Swarm, but if you like, I can offer help or give an external opinion on that discussion. However, maybe you could summarize the current state of consensus and the open questions (best on a sub-page of that talk page, not here), because it has grown terribly large o.0. I've dropped a note on your talk page, like some others, too - have a look! Se'taan (talk) 07:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Swarm: Sorry for abusing your talk page as a message board, I'm just not sure how to otherwise reach SailinStuff. Se'taan (talk) 07:44, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Earlier Adoption Offer

Hi Swarm,

some time ago, you were so nice to offer to adopt me (well, it's roughly... 2 years ago o.0°). First of all, thanks for that, and sorry for not replying. I was something of a Wiki-... Undead, still on the wiki, but not alive, if you know what I mean.

I'm trying to get back to editing and would mainly need someone to point me to relevant guidelines / tutorials / help pages when I don't know where to start looking for them (or, how they might even be called). I'm not on a deadline, laid-back answering approach would be just fine :-)

I'm not sure if you have the time, but if so (and also if not, of course ;-) ), a reply anywhere is appreciated very much! Se'taan (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify April Drive

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Wikify's April Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive. We'll be trying to reduce the backlog size by over 500 articles and we need your help! Hard-working participants in the drive will receive awards for their contributions. If you have a spare moment, please join and wikify an article or tell your friends. Thanks!

-- Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify.

GOCE April 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our March backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the April blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice of WP:AN discussion

Hello Swarm, this is notification of a WP:AN discussion regarding an editor you have dealt with. The thread is: WP:AN#Community ban for BLP-violating, sock-hopping conspiracy theorist from Hyogo, Japan. Appreciate your input, thanks! Zad68 18:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

GOCE April 2013 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2013 events newsletter We finished the April blitz and are preparing to start our May backlog elimination drive. The April 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the May drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Mentorship

Hey there Swarm! I was wondering if you are still open to being a mentor. Found your name listed on the list and thought I'd ask. --Syed Kazim ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 12:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Mentorship

Hey there Swarm! I was wondering if you are still open to being a mentor. Found your name listed on the list and thought I'd ask. --Syed Kazim ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 12:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Swarm! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! EdwardsBot (talk) 14:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre

Hello! Now, some of you might be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers: Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with, the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment session...you can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available". Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497). Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk) This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 01:16, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors May 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our May backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the June blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE June/July 2013 events

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our June blitz and are about to commence our July backlog elimination drive. The June/July 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis Sign up for the July drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment requested

Hi Swarm. As a former contributor to this, you may wish to take a look at this. If you do, please read it carefully in order not to miss the explicit objective. Comments on its talk page. Cheers, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:58, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Chagos Islands national football team for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chagos Islands national football team is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chagos Islands national football team (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

This is an article previously delete at AFD (twice) that you restored so giving you a courtesy notice that I have taken it back there. GiantSnowman 09:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 news report

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now! Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article. – Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

A question

How am I supposed to contribute when my edits are deleted and if I revert those deletions I get blocked? As I have explained, the users opposing my edits insist on 100% deletion even though they generally refuse to make any specific comments on what they do not like. They generally only respond haphazardly at all and have by and large simply ignored any effort I make to compromise.

CJK (talk) 20:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

That is not true. My replies to CJK have been very detailed and specific. Until today, I have only reverted monolithic edits which replaced the views with which CJK disagrees with those he wants to have included. I have spent hours trying to work on compromise proposals which add his favored views to the article without deleting those he dislikes. EllenCT (talk) 22:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

CJK on Iraq war

Hi Swarm, you blocked CJK for edit warring on Iraq war for a day earlier in the week, and since his return, in my opinion he has been much worse, making outright misleading statements on the talkpage and replacing lengthy sections with a few sentences citing only the single source supporting the very minority viewpoint he agrees with. He continues to fight against the consensus of all the other editors on the article, at least five or seven editors now. I don't want to see him blocked again, but I've repeatedly asked that he seek some kind of dispute resolution procedure which can help him create better compromise texts. At one point he was getting pretty close to some compromise proposals with which I almost agreed, but it wasn't enough for him so he started accusing me of having no support for my opinions, and started claiming that not responding to him after a few days signals agreement with him.

Is there any way you can give him a choice between further sanction and participating in a collaborative dispute resolution procedure aimed at working on mutually agreeable compromises which include his views without deleting the views he disagrees with? I've never used the dispute noticeboard or looked closely at anything much more than third opinion requests, and this is way beyond that now, so I really don't know what to do. Thanks for any help you can provide. EllenCT (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Potential Adoptee

Hi, I've recently registered and there's a lot I don't know. I'm not likely to create many articles, but have been trying to do the minor edits suggested. They're mostly on subjects of which I know little (though my general knowledge is pretty good if I may say so) but I'm sometimes unsure what's best to do. I've also built up a file of questions which a WP expert could probably answer in seconds, and imagine I'll generate more. I'm familiar with HTML syntax though no expert, and unfortunately don't have easy access to a good reference library to check secondary sources.

Would you be willing to adopt me? I'm a quick learner and hopefully won't be too much of a burden. Chrismorey (talk) 02:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

• As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions03:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

question on changing account name

Hi Swarm, One of the admins said they don't like my account name. Now that I have a little experience with Wikipedia, I get that this account name sounds sort of sanctimonious in debates. WP:Account says "User accounts with few or no edits might not be renamed, as it is quicker and easier to simply create a new account." How do I determine if I have few enough edits to create a new account? If I create a new account, is there anything I need to do (besides never accessing the old account) to avoid any appearance of sockpuppeting? Thanks for any info -Truthwillneverdie (talk) 01:02, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, you can change your username at Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. That quote's meant to imply that you can just create a new account if your old one is unused. Since you have nearly 200 edits and are active, it doesn't really apply and I think they'd certainly rename your account. Alternatively, you absolutely have the option to abandon this account and start with a new one (you can learn the proper way to do this at Wikipedia:Clean start). As long as you use only one account in good faith, you should never have to worry about the 'appearance' of socking. Swarm ^X 18:26, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 copy edit drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter We have completed our July backlog elimination drive. The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the August blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up and September 2013 drive invitation

Guild of Copy Editors August Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of sixteen people who signed up for this blitz, nine copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 26 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the September drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the September drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 Wikification Drive

This message was delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To stop receiving messages from WikiProject Wikify, remove your name from the recipients page. -- EdwardsBot (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Memories; worth remembrance!

Greetings Swarm. Once again I have recalled a memory, reminding me that I have missed earlier times when I had the good fortune of seeing your editing activity regularly; and often. Nevertheless, with each tomorrow I am blessed to enjoy, of certainty it will culminate as a day closer to the one when I will remember my friend and colleague, Swarm; and will, on that day, pay homage to your talk page to remind you of my debt which remains! The gift of things remembered continues to empower my endurance and my ability to sustain; even prevail. I hope my greetings reach you in the midst of a joyous occasion; finding you prosperous and well. And I look forward to the future when I will remember you again; and say thanks. With esteem.—John Cline (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

GOCE September 2013 drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors September 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The September 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the October blitz! – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up; join us for the November drive

Guild of Copy Editors October Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of eleven people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we copy edited 42 articles from WikiProject Film's backlog, reducing it by a net of 34 articles. Hope to see you at the November drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the November drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

Hello! A GAN Backlog Drive will begin in less than 4 days! In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or leave a message on the Backlog Drive talk page. And remember, there are less than 4 days before the drive starts!--EdwardsBot (talk) 03:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify: November Newsletter and December Drive

Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To unsubscribe remove your username from this list. EdwardsBot (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

Hello! Just a friendly reminder that the GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on December 31, 2013! If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! If you have any questions or want to comment about something regarding the drive, post them here--EdwardsBot (talk) 00:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

November 2013 GOCE drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors November 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The November 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the December blitz! – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

GOCE December 2013 Blitz wrap-up and January Drive invitation

December Notes from the Guild of Copy Editors The December blitz ran from December 8–14. The theme for this blitz was articles tied in some way to religion. Seven editors knocked out 20 articles over the course of the week. Our next blitz will be in February, with a theme to be determined. Feel free to make theme suggestions at the Guild talk page! The January 2014 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in October and November 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2013. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in October and November 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! Coordinator election: Voting is open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January through 30 June 2014. Voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

GOCE 2013 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2013 Annual Report The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2013 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Jonesey95 Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

March GOCE copyedit drive

Notes from the Guild of Copy Editors The March 2014 backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles in need of copyediting. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copyedit all articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and to complete all requests placed in January 2014. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copyedits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: number of articles, number of words, number of articles over 5,000 words, number of articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and the longest article. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)|} March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive It's that time again! Starting on March 1, there will be another GAN Backlog Drive! There will be several changes compared to previous drives: This drive will introduce a new component to it; a point system. In a nutshell, older nominations are worth more points than newer nominations. The top 3 participants who have the points will be awarded the Golden, Silver, or Bronze Wikipedia Puzzle Piece Trophy, respectively. Unlike the December 2013 Backlog Drive, earning an additional barnstar if you reached your goal has been removed. The allowance to have insufficient reviews has been lowered to 2 before being disqualified. An exception to the rule that all reviews must be completed before the deadline has been created. Also, something that I thought I would share with all of you is that we raised $20.88 (USD) for the WMF in the December 2013 drive. It may not sound like a lot but considering that that was raised just because we reviewed articles, I would say that's pretty good! With that success, pledges can be made for the upcoming drive if you wish. More info regarding the drive and full descriptions regarding the changes to this drive can be found on the the drive page. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the drive talk page. I look forward to your participation and hope that because of it, some day the backlog will be gone! --Dom497 --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC) GAN March 2014 Backlog Drive The March 2014 GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on April 1, 2014! Sent by Dom497 on behalf of MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC) An RfC that you may be interested in... As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing! This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC) GOCE March drive wrapup Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The March 2014 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the April blitz! – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Thanks to all who participated in the drive and helped out behind the scenes. 42 people signed up for this drive and 28 of these completed at least one article. Final results are available here. Progress report: Articles tagged during the target months of December 2012 and January 2013 were reduced from 177 to 33, and the overall backlog was reduced by 13 articles. The total backlog was 2,902 articles at the end of March. On the Requests page during March, 26 copy edit requests were completed, all requests from January 2014 were completed, and the length of the queue was reduced by 11 articles. Blitz!: The April blitz will run from April 13–19, with a focus on the Requests list. Sign up now! – Your drive coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC) April blitz wrap-up and May copyediting drive invitation Guild of Copy Editors April 2014 Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of 17 people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 28 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the May drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Request for comment Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC) GOCE June 2014 newsletter Guild of Copy Editors May 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 51 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2,987 articles to 2,236 articles in May, the lowest backlog total since we began keeping records in 2009! Since at least 300 new articles were tagged during May, that means we copy edited over 1,000 articles in a single month. Amazing work, everyone! Blitz: The June blitz will run from June 15–21. This blitz's theme is Politics. Sign up here. Election: You can nominate yourself or others for the role of Coordinator for the second half of 2014 here. Nominations will be accepted until June 14. Voting will begin on June 15 and will conclude on June 28. Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC) GOCE July 2014 newsletter Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights: Sign up for the July 2014 Backlog elimination drive Review the Coordinators election results – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC) Orphaned non-free image File:Relativity media logo 2010.jpg ⚠ Thanks for uploading File:Relativity media logo 2010.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media). Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:25, 29 July 2014 (UTC) Hi Swarm Can you please help me with a Revision Deletion? I may have gotten carried away with my comments and it was scene by a coworker. Any help would be greatly appreciated I am referring to the 3 times I made an EDIT SUMMARY on this page regarding our real names and safety concerns. Thank you! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Duran_and_the_Morning_Show — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.209.23.146 (talk) 17:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Please forgive my typo in my last post where I typed SCENE instead of seen. WikiProject Good articles Future GAN Backlog Drive Hello everyone! Hope you've all been having a great summer! TheQ Editor recently proposed the idea of having another Backlog Drive in either September/October or November/December of this year. For those of you who have participated in the past two drives you know I was the one who organized them, however, come September, this will be my most important year in school so I will not be able to coordinate this drive (if it happens). TheQ Editor has volunteered to be a coordinator for the drive. If any of you would like to co-coordinator, please notify TheQ Editor on his talk page. If you would be interested in participating in a Backlog Drive sometime before the end of this year, please notify TheQ Editor. Also, make sure to specify what month(s) work best for you. At the time this message was sent out, the backlog was at 520 nominations. Since May, the backlog has been steadily increasing and we are currently near an all time high. Even though the backlog will not disappear over one drive, this drive can lead to several others which will (hopefully) lead to the day where there is no longer a backlog. As always, the more participants, the better, and everyone is encouraged to participate! Sent by Dom497--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC) GOCE July drive and August blitz Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone! Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC) GA Cup Hello everyone! We hope you have all been having a great summer! As we all know, the recent GAN Backlog Drives have not had any big impact on the backlog. Because of that, me (Dom497), Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor have worked on an idea that could possibly finally put a dent into the massive backlog. Now, I will admit, the idea isn't entirely ours as we have took the general idea of the WikiCup and brought it over to WikiProject Good Articles. But anyways, here's what we have in mind: For all of you that do not know what the WikiCup is, it is an annual competition between several editors to see who can get the most Good Articles, Featured Article's, Did You Know's, etc. Based of this, we propose to you the GA Cup. This competition will only focus on reviewing Good articles. For more info on the proposal, click here. As a FYI, the proposal page is not what the final product will look like (if you do go ahead with this idea). It will look very similar to WikiCup's page(s). The discussion for the proposal will take place here. Please let us know if you are interested, have any concerns, things to consider, etc. --Dom497, Figureskatingfan, and TheQ Editor MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2014 (UTC) WikiProject Good Articles - GA Cup WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup WikiProject Good articles is holding a new competition, the GA Cup, from October 1, 2014 - March 28, 2015. The Cup will be based on reviewing Good article nominations; for each review, points will be awarded with bonuses for older nominations, longer articles and comprehensive reviews. All participants will start off in one group and the highest scoring participants will go through to the second round. At the moment six rounds are planned, but this may change based on participant numbers. Some of you may ask: what is the purpose for a competition of this type? Currently, there is a backlog of about 500 unreviewed Good article nominations, almost an all time high. It is our hope that we can decrease the backlog in a fun way, through friendly competition. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors! Sign-ups will be open until October 15, 2014 so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the four judges. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC) To receive future GA Cup newsletter, please add your name to our mailing list. October 2014 Wikification Drive This message was delivered on behalf of WikiProject Wikify. To stop receiving messages from WikiProject Wikify, remove your name from the recipients page. -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC) GOCE October 2014 newsletter Guild of Copy Editors October 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights: Results of the August Blitz and September Drive A few changes around the Guild's pages Sign up for the October Blitz Review the Coordinators election results – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC) Happy adminship anniversary! Wishing Swarm/Archive 8 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Anastasia [Missionedit] (talk) 16:39, 19 November 2014 (UTC) GOCE February blitz wrapup Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2014 wrap-up Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 16 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by --Bigdisneyfanatic (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC) I am looking to be adopted and learn about editing on wikipedia. GOCE coordinator elections Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Candidate nominations for Guild coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015, are currently underway. The nomination period will close at 23:59 on December 15 (UTC), after which voting will commence until 23:59 on December 31, 2014. Self-nominations are welcomed. Please consider getting involved; it's your Guild and it won't coordinate itself, so if you'd like to help coordinate Guild activities we'd love to hear from you. Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC) December 2014 GOCE newsletter Guild of Copy Editors December 2014 Newsletter Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in November's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 43 people who signed up for this drive, 26 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: The November Drive removed 26 requests from the Requests page and 509 articles from the {{copy edit}} backlog. We copy edited 83 articles tagged in the target months; July, August, and September 2013. Together with tag removals from articles unsuitable for copy editing, we eliminated July 2013 from the backlog and reduced August and September's tags to 61 and 70 respectively. As of 01:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC), the backlog stood at 1,974 articles, dipping below 2,000 for the first time in the Guild's history (see graph at right). Well done everyone! Blitz: The December Blitz will run from December 14–20 and will focus on articles related to Religion, in recognition of this month's religious holidays in much of the English-speaking world. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. Sign up here! Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from 1 January to 30 June 2015 is now underway. Candidates can nominate themselves or others from December 01, 00:01 (UTC), until December 15, 23:59. The voting period will run from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. You can read about coordinators' duties here. Please consider getting involved and remember to cast you vote—it's your Guild and it doesn't organize itself! Thank you all once again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve anything without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2014 (UTC) Hi I came across your page as you are requesting adoptees? Hi, my name is Daniel Ward and I live in Huddersfield, England. I am interested in and consider myself fairly knowledgeable in world geography, sports, chess and music. I would like to create new pages and add pictures to articles without them, especially geographical ones as I notice there are many European and world places, rivers and mountains for instance that only have stub articles or don't have articles in the English Wikipedia at all but do have pages in other languages. I am not too tech savvy so you may have to be patient with me. Would you be able to help me get started? Thank you, Danny. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huddsblue (talk • contribs) 22:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC) GOCE holiday 2014 newsletter Guild of Copy Editors Late December 2014 Newsletter Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the December Blitz. Of the 14 editors who signed up for the blitz, 11 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. January drive: The January backlog-reduction drive is just around the corner; sign up here! Election time again: The election of coordinators to serve from January 1 to June 30, 2015 is now underway. The voting period runs from December 16, 00:01 (UTC), until December 31, 23:59. Please cast your vote—it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself! Happy holidays from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC) You've got mail! Hello, Swarm. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 11:50, 27 December 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. —Sadat (Masssly)❤Talk☮C☺Email☯ 11:50, 27 December 2014 (UTC) Live happy and well Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!! Hello Swarm, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, --John Cline (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. GOCE 2014 report Guild of Copy Editors 2014 Annual Report Our 2014 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Review the election results; Membership news; Changes around the Guild's pages; Plans for 2015. – Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC) February 2015 GOCE newsletter Guild of Copy Editors February 2015 Newsletter Drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. Of the 38 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We were able to remove August 2013 from the general copyediting backlog and November 2014 from the request-page backlog. Many thanks, everyone! Blitz: The February Blitz will run from February 15–21 and again focuses on the requests page. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one request article. Sign up here! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Jonesey95, Biblioworm and Philg88. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC) February 2015 Wikification drive Greetings! Just spreading a message to the members of WikiProject Wikify that the February drive has been started. Better late than never! Come on, sign up! :) Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 00:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC) fyi The John Daley sockpuppet is back Saturn star (talk) 23:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Not sure who you're talking about...can you explain a bit more? What do you need from me? Swarm X 23:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC) They seem to be a pretty active sockpuppeter and its not the first time they have edited like this and they also put a false ban template on my userpage I just wanted the admins of the site to know hope you don't mind Saturn star (talk) 23:50, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Whoops spelled the name wrong I meant John Daker they are also putting false compromised account things on my userpage Saturn star (talk) 23:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC) Ah, gotcha. Thanks for letting me know. I've blocked the account and tagged it as a sockpuppet of John Daker. Let me know if you encounter any more trouble! Swarm X 00:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Random question... Hello, Swarm! Random question here: are non-Admins allowed to do non-Admin "closes" (e.g. {{Archive top}}, etc.) of threads at noticeboards like WP:ANI, or are only Admins allowed to do that? If regular editors are allowed to "close", under what circumstances would a non-Admin "close" of a topic be considered "OK"? I only ask, because I saw a couple of topics on WP:ANI yesterday that looked like they had resolved, but they never ended up getting "closed", so I wondered if regular editors were allowed to do "closes" in situations like that... Thanks in advance! --IJBall (talk) 19:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Hey there. To put it simply, yes, non-admin closure is allowed if it's for an uncontroversial or procedural reason. For example, if a discussion is obviously resolved, a non-admin can indeed 'archive' it and write the resolution in there. It's no problem. Another example in which it's okay would be deletion discussions with an obvious 'keep' consensus that have passed their deadline for closure, but remain open. As long as it's done properly, a non-admin can perform such a closure. Non-admin closures can be reviewed and overturned by any admin, but as long as they're done "correctly", they're pretty much always tolerated. You can read the actual "rule" on this at WP:NACD. A good essay that expands on this practice and is basically generally accepted as a guideline is WP:NAC. But yeah, I used to perform non-admin closes all the time before I became a non-admin, stayed within the bounds of what that essay described and never had any complications or challenges. Let me know if you have any other questions! Swarm X 21:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Thanks a lot for responding. I've given my first couple of non-Admin closings at WP:ANI a try! Now that I know it's OK to do these (in certain circumstances), I'll be on the lookout for resolved threads in need of closing next time I'm at someplace like WP:ANI...  :) --IJBall (talk) 22:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Thanks for your help! :) Swarm X 22:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC) ANI Since the thread was locked before I could make a response, there are a few things I think need to be cleared up. I mistaked their edits for Original Research, and didn't realise my error untill the ANI report was filed. And I've always been one who focuses more on the actions rather than the motivation. I never realized my mistake untill it was too late, and I apologize for that. I shoud've talked about assuming good faith on their talk page, but I got too used to ANI that I made the wrong decision. I apologize for my immature behavior. Weegeerunner (talk) 01:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC) One more thing, seeing as you are on this list, may I request a 2 week block on my account? Weegeerunner (talk) 01:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC) Thanks for the message, and no worries! I totally understand, mistakes happen, I've certainly done the same thing before. Sorry if I came off as harsh, I know you only had good intentions. And sure, I will block your account for two weeks as requested. Remember to use {{unblock}} if you need the block lifted before it expires! Best regards, Swarm X 01:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC) Nonsense blanking in talk page:Smukkrukkjujj It has been apparent that Smukkrukkjujj has been blanking his own talk page to replace the block template with blatant nonsense characters. He has been blocked for creating nonsense pages (i.e., blocked for abuse of editing privileges), but he just conceals the block template and he probably harassed me on his own talk page by dropping the F-Bomb twice on one of his nonsense edits on his talk page. Would it be possible to change the block into a hard block or just modify its level so he wouldn't be able to edit his talk page while he is blocked? Thank you. Snowager-Talk 01:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC) Yep, I just noticed that and revoked his talk page access, so he won't be causing any more disruption. :) Thanks. Swarm X 01:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC) Maureen O'Connor change thanks for adding the line about dismissal of charges against Maureen O'Connor. I've found one published (internet/tv) source for that info, and have added that as a reference. There are a number of inaccuracies (slight) remaining in the existing page, which I'll try to get to as time permits. Theoldgringo (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC) vandalism of Edinburgh Academy I just posted a RPP with twinkle requesting the page be protected. The entire 50 most recent edits were all vandalism or reporting vandalism. Most of the edits were made by new accounts, after an IP address was blocked for vandalizing the page. Not sure how to go about CheckUser requests, but it seems fishy. @NDKilla^^^ 21:55, 26 February 2015 (UTC) Maybe also Merchiston Castle School? —George8211 / T 22:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC) Both pages semi-protected for one month. Hopefully that'll be enough! Thanks guys. :) Swarm X 22:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC) Bosnia and Herzegovina Thanks for lowering the protection level as I requested. I have finished updating (completed all fields of the Infobox). Please raise the level back to full, for some time at least, until emotions cool down. Thanks. Sevvyan (talk) 06:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC) Infobox Electoral Reform Hi Swarm, I noticed you closed some of the very old TfDs of november 29. Thank you for that. One of them was the infobox electoral reform, used on Electoral reform in Virginia. After closing the discussion, the page now has a deleted infobox on it. What is the suggested action for that page? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 06:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Hi, Swarm. Please restore this template; it probably shouldn't be deleted before it's been "prosified". Alakzi (talk) 19:47, 28 February 2015 (UTC) A response wouldn't go amiss. Are you going to restore it or not? Alakzi (talk) 23:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC) 3 days have now passed. If you're not gonna make time to respond to queries that concern your administrative actions, you should consider not taking said administrative actions. Alakzi (talk) 03:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC) My apologies—you're right. I've been distracted with other things and never replied. Also I misunderstood your statement and wasn't really sure what you were talking about. Originally I figured if no one was willing there's no point in leaving the discussion open indefinitely. But since I assume this means you're willing to do the work I'll restore it. If no one does it it's going to be deleted again. Swarm X 04:02, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Thanks. I guess you don't stop by TFD often; it's not unusual for a discussion to be closed but the template not immediately deleted. Bask in the glory of our pen. Anyway, I'll leave you a note when I'm done with this one. Alakzi (talk) 04:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Cool! Thanks. Swarm X 05:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Done. Thanks! Alakzi (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Template:Quotation Please explain your reasons for closing Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 November 29#Template:Quotation as "no consensus". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC) I think there's a legitimate case made there for merging to the new code, which wasn't available at the beginning of the discussion. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC) The discussion was left open for long period and no clear consensus had developed on what action should be taken, and it didn't appear as if that was going to change even if it were left open for another month. I agree that there's a reasonable case for merging and keep in mind it's not a bureaucracy. You're perfectly welcome to be bold and perform the merge yourself and see how it goes. You're a template editor. Swarm X 18:31, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Please revise your closing remark to that effect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Done. Swarm X 23:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC) HanSangYoon continues editwar https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Busan_Metro_Line_1&diff=prev&oldid=649197550 Your criticism failed, CG. What's more, I have well explained on both your talk page and the criticism page of why your image was a degradation. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Wow. I give him a break because of his "good faith" self-reversion and he literally continued the edit war immediately after. Thanks for the notification. Swarm X 17:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Yeah. Sorry it was necessary. :-( --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Agree completely, let me know if it continues. Swarm X 18:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC) For what its worth, I'm not thrilled with this outcome either. I don't have anything against HanSangYoon, I just want them to discuss changes and accept community consensus. I was actually quite hopeful that the reversion meant they'd understood edit-warring wasn't on and would discuss the addition. ColonialGrid (talk) 19:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC) User:Uniquark9 Since you were the blocking admin, once Uniquark9's block was over he immediately reverted the edits by User:Rajmaan which consisted of 3 different articles.[3][4][5] All these reverts removed references and referenced information and all had edit summaries stating, "Restoring to a version before Rajmaan's edits". Clearly an attempt to make the issue personal. Just thought I would let you know. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:31, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Thank you for catching this and letting me know! I think another block is in order since the first one obviously didn't get through to him. Swarm X 23:33, 28 February 2015 (UTC) Thanks to both of you for following up on this. But to correct the record, he was blocked for the first time in December for edit warring and employing a sock in an edit war. He frequently blanks his talk page to hide the steady stream of notices, warnings, and complaints that he has amassed in the past few months. An incident report was pursued a couple of weeks ago with no resolution. His pattern of disruption (and possible sock puppetry) are described further there, with several editors contributing. I bring this up not to pile on, but it is important that the full extent of his behavior is understood. I and other editors have repeatedly tried to get Uniquark9 to recognize and adhere to WP guidelines, but this mass reversion is a typical response. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC) Well damn. I didn't know all that! Thanks Laszlo! --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC) Self blocks As your name appears on Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to consider placing self-requested blocks, you may sign at the newly revamped Wikipedia:Block on demand page, along with comments and a link to your requirements page, if any. I hope I did not err in sort of reviving that page. Thanks, SD0001 (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2015 (UTC) Unblock review conflict Hi, It appears that we've conflicted on the 80.X IP block. As the block was only for the legal threat, I planned on unblocking it with a word of caution. My original unlock message is as follows: With the legal threat retracted, I've unblocked you. A few words of caution, please be careful with how you conduct yourself on Wikipedia. If you do so in a disruptive manner, you may face another block. Any additional legal threats will result in the block being reinstated, no matter the account or IP. If you wish to re-block it, I don't have a strong opinion here. Best, Mike V • Talk 00:23, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Ha! I saw that and was just about to tell you on your talk page. I really don't have a strong opinion here either but you unblocked the IP at exactly the same time I updated the block log after declining the unblock request.[6] It was not an intentional reversion of your unblock. I shall cede to your judgment. Willing to give anyone another chance. Swarm X 00:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Hello Hello. Do you mind taking a look at this? I don't feel like explains in great detail despite it already being done on the article itself. I would prefer to sleep. AcidSnow (talk) 08:15, 8 March 2015 (UTC) Done. Sorry, just now got around to it. Swarm... —X— 17:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC) Don't worry and thank you! AcidSnow (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC) User accusing me of being a sock puppet of HGA Hi, It appears that user talk:64.134.157.208 has accused me of being the "sock puppet" of user talk:Hga, which is not the case. I have asked him to cease but he has now spread this to the discussion page for the AfD for Hoplophobia. He is falsely accusing me of this activity and trying to sway opinion on the discussion page. I removed the accusation from the AfD page and he has put it back. Is there anything that can be done to stop this?99.242.102.111 (talk) 01:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC) It appears IP 99 is canvassing here. Hga and 99 are both including material from fringe blogs which in no way meet Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources and they were recently warned of that and they deleted the warnings and reinserted the crappy sources and material. Hga has been editing (owning) the article for years. They have had plenty of time to find reliable sources and clearly have not done that so their terribly sourced material should be deleted IAW policy. They should find a source that meets the reliable source guidelines before reinserting material about a person who died in the last 10 years. Hga appear to be asking for a check user on the ANI. It would be very helpful but in no way give them the right to keep putting crap in articles. Thanks 64.134.157.208 (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC) Here is the crap they both keep adding. [7] Not something that is even remotely acceptable. They have demonstrated long term tendentious edit warring in the articles history. 64.134.157.208 (talk) 02:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC) OK, here's something I can speak definitively about, the edit reference to an issue of Cooper's Commentaries where he reiterated his rules of gun safety, life and death important since they are generally considered to be the best. However people were modifying them, and after some searching I realized those who weren't "improving" them were using corrupt texts. So I found the most recent direct quote of Coopers, put that text in there, and made a link to the DVC site (if I remember correctly), one of the many sub rosa copies of the Commentaries on the net. That citation seems to have been changed into two different onee, but, as I've said on the talk page and the ANI section, I have the authorized paper copies of Commentaries on order, and I will in due course be updating all references to the Commentaries to these 3 bound volumes. Hga (talk) 02:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC) FYI regarding Joseph Prasad Just so you know, blocked editor User:Joseph Prasad is trying to recruit at least one other editor to proxy/meatpuppet for him at the Seth MacFarlane talk page discussion where he was edit warring (see here: [8]). I tried to explain to him (firmly) that such a practice is verboten, and add some advice regarding his block (see all the comments from me and him here [9]), but he wouldn't hear of it and deleted the comments as "harassing". Maybe you will see a need to let him know that such behavior (recruiting meat puppets) is against policy? Thanks,-- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:41, 11 March 2015 (UTC) User talk:Fibrowarrior Regardless of the merits of the unblock request and your accept, courtesy and policy "require" that you check with the blocking administrator before accepting the request.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC) You're right, sorry. Accepting unblock requests isn't something I commonly do. I've brushed up on the unblocking policy and will be sure to remember this in the future. Thanks for the reminder, it only helps me improve! Swarm... —X— 01:24, 11 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you! . . .and question Hello Swarm, Thank you for your prompt response to the issue which I posted on the Edit Warring Noticeboard regarding the Glengarry Glen Ross (film) page. [[10]] That was my first time on an administrator noticeboard and I had no idea what might happen. I hate to bother you with a question: I see that User:LawrencePrincipe has been blocked. Would it be appropriate for me to now restore the material that he was deleting? Or must I leave it alone? Thank you again, Xanthis (talk) 07:22, 12 March 2015 (UTC) I saw your edit just now, which makes my question moot. Thanks again. Xanthis (talk) 07:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Hey Xanthis, thanks for bringing the issue to our attention. And don't even worry about bothering me, it's our job to help out other people! It's good you asked instead of simply reverting again; the removal was inappropriate so yeah I've gone ahead and restored the content as it's being discussed still. But it's generally best practice to revert as little as possible, and never to break wp:3rr. Even if you're "right" in a dispute! You did the right thing by reporting your issue. Swarm... —X— 07:38, 12 March 2015 (UTC) RPP As a follow up from the recent 3RR block you performed ([11]) letting you know I have requested page protection at the article Drake Discography (see here: [12]). The RPP was requested prior to the block of those two editors. Additionally, another editor whose edit warring block will expire shortly was also edit warring at that same article before his block. There is a current content dispute there that has not been addressed at the article's talk page. Based on this [13] I think it's entirely possible the editor to be unblocked shortly might take advantage of the other two editors being blocked from editing. The RPP is purely preventative and I think that even though the other two are now blocked from editing, there will still be problems there. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC) I recommended to the third editor that they refrain from editing while the other two are blocked to precisely avoid this impression. I've also recommended to Joseph Prasad that they start a discussion thread on the article talk page after the expiration of the other two blocks. Requesting preemptive page protection on the assumption that they will take advantage of the block is an assumption of bad faith and the request should be rejected. Blackmane (talk) 03:51, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Bad faith only as a result of his recent behavior with inviting meatpuppetry, edit warring and not believing he was edit warring, his refusal to look at his behavior and having a plan to improve, his willingness to immediately jump into the fray as savior of the Wiki as soon as his block is up. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:09, 12 March 2015 (UTC) I've declined that request because pages are not protected preemptively. The user is welcome to edit as a productive Wikipedian once their block expires, and has agreed to stay away from the page in question and per WP:AGF we should take their word on that. They don't want to get blocked again and seem to realize that they will be if they return to their old behavior, and if that happens we can deal with it then. Swarm... —X— 06:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Winkelvi, I recommend that you disengage from Joseph Prasad and let him be about his business. If they edit war again they'll be blocked again, if not then fine. Going over past history is as useful as chewing over mouthfuls of old soup. Blackmane (talk) 08:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Recommend all you like, Blackmane, he's going to mess up again, just like he did before, because he is not listening to what experienced editors and administrators are telling him. In fact, after promising to stay away from the Drake Discography article for a while, he's back there (and at the Drake (rapper) article) again today [14], [15]. And he never started a talk page discussion as he promised he would do, either. [16]. So much for "let[ting] him be about his business". He's testing the waters to see how much he can get away with, just like all the other times when he would edit war and was allowed to continue unfettered. Obviously, he has NOT learned anything and his word is not to be trusted. He's playing us. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Winkelvi, if he does, then he does and he'll be blocked for it. Blocks are cheap. People, including myself, have been offering advice in good faith. It's up to him whether he takes that on board and moves forward with it. If he doesn't then all it cost was few minutes of time and a some keystrokes. There's little point getting worked up or poking the bear about it. Blackmane (talk) 22:24, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Winkelvi I said I would stay away from the articles on the argument of studio album vs. mixtape. Nothing else. I was updating chart positions, and there is no reason to make the discussion until the other two are unblocked. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 00:24, 13 March 2015 (UTC) That isn't the impression you left with any of us. But I think you already knew that. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:31, 13 March 2015 (UTC) winkelvi, if you actually looked on my talk page, it's exactly what I said. Wait until the expiration of the block. The studio vs. mixtape problem, I'll go back to once they are unblocked to discuss on the talk. There is nothing wrong with correcting a typo and updating a chart position. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 00:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Like I said, that's not the impression you left with the three of us (Swarm, Blackmane, and myself). Hence, Swarm's comments above - which I'm certain you saw hours ago, yet did not correct - "has agreed to stay away from the page in question and per WP:AGF we should take their word on that". What's more, you didn't say you would go back after their block, you said you said you would be going to the article talk page and starting a discussion: "I'm not going to edit the article in the matter of mixtape vs. album. I will create a discussion at the talk page and invite them." (link to diff here [17]) That meant (at least to me, and I bet the other two as well) that you would be doing it as soon as your block was up. But this is all just a bunch of "you said..."; "no, I didn't" baloney at this point. I, for one, don't buy your explanations and believe you've taken advantage of AGF and trust. Personally, I'm done supporting and trying to help you out. The others can go on doing that, but I'm finished. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:48, 13 March 2015 (UTC) winkelvi, how are you trying to help me out? It seems like you just feel the need to complain to other editors. And, I took Blackmane's recommendation: " I've also recommended to Joseph Prasad that they start a discussion thread on the article talk page after the expiration of the other two blocks." Why would I start a dicussion when the editors who are arguing can't discuss? It would be for naught. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 01:56, 13 March 2015 (UTC) How the hell do I know why you would do it? The fact is you said you would do it, another fact is you allowed three veteran, experienced editors to believe you were going to leave that article alone. One was a complete lie the other was a lie by omission. In my book, that means you can't be trusted. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:05, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Actually, no, winkelvi, I only made you believe, because the quote you gave says: "I'm not going to edit the article in the matter of mixtape vs. album. I will create a discussion at the talk page and invite them." I believed that that was pretty obvious that I was leaving the article alone. Again, there is no reason to start a discussion no one will comment on for another two days. I have not done anything wrong, you are just accusing me of being untrustworthy when I have done well with others in the past. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 02:11, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Nice try, but no -- that's not the case. Swarm thought so (what is it about "The user...has agreed to stay away from the page in question"' is eluding you?); I bet Blackmane thought so, as well (although I could be wrong, but even so, that's two out of three). You think you haven't done anything wrong -- well, that's no big surprise, you never think you do anything wrong, it's always the other guy (remember when I said "act like a child and you will be treated like a child"? -- well, guess what? by blaming someone else you're acting like a child again). And I'm not "accusing" you of not being trustworthy; recently, you've absolutely proven time and again you are not worthy of my trust. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Actually, winkelvi, no on Blackmane, for the fact that he italicized "after" in his wording, which means he clearly meant after the blocks. And again, there is no point in making a discussion at the moment. And, you weren't acting like a child when you kept commenting on my age, and other things? I have not seen you once on another editor like this, yet you claim it's not personal, it's pretty clear it is. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Discussion on Taylor Swift Can you take part in a discussion on Taylor Swift's talk page under the heading "Image"? Thank you in advance. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 03:01, 13 March 2015 (UTC) Explanations. I was merely reverting as concensus was making it clear that until the WWE announced it on the official website that Daniel Bryan wasn't in the match. Furthermore when I was insulting the editor that started after on the first revert I said "Hell No" regarding the adding of Daniel Bryan in the event before official announcements. Then of course he later said I had power (I am not an Admin and I've never sent an RfA.), Resulting in me saying that the wrestlers were smarter than him. (Infact all my mockings were based on John Cena quotes from his "I Quit" Match at Over the Limit (2011)). Then I tried to communicate with him to resolve matters resulting in him calling me annoying, a dumbass and to not contact him there. That is my explanation for my edits. Thanks! TheGRVOfLightning (talk) 03:02, 13 March 2015 (UTC) User abusing rollback privileges Hello, I noticed you recently granted rollback privileges to User:ToonLucas22. He/she violated the rule "Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits." at [18], leaving this [19] comment incorrectly stating that I had removed content without stating why, when in fact, I left a detailed edit summary [20] explaining why trivial nonnotable traffic incidents do not belong in a BLP. Dngmnglr (talk) 20:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC) @Dngmnglr: I was using STiki at that time, and I forgot to view the edit summary. Sorry for that. --ToonLucas22 (talk) 20:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC) @ToonLucas22: Apology accepted, mistakes happen. Dngmnglr (talk) 20:49, 14 March 2015 (UTC)User abusing rollback privileges[edit] Another discussion with Chealer Hello! Regarding the account blocking discussion that recently took place in User talk:Chealer § March 2015, I'd just like to let you know there's a past discussion with Chealer that you might want to have a look at: Talk:Linux distribution § Information on GNU/Linux. To me, that was a pointless and really painful debate, which back at the time I've characterized as "bordering with trolling". — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:27, 15 March 2015 (UTC) A barnstar for you! The Barnstar of Good Humor Thanks for your kindness to approve me the first English wiki right. — Masum Ibn Musa  Conversation 06:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC) Thanks! Happy to oblige, you seem like a pretty cool guy. :) Swarm... —X— 17:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC) PNAC Kindly note the repeated insertion of BLP violations at Project for the New American Century [21] et seq [22] et seq (new editor "Dbdb" suddenly appearing making same edits as Ubikwit in the past) [23] (many edits includingBLP violations following) [24] third Ubikwit revert within less than 24 hours. In describing the Bush's primary advisors, including prominent PNAC members Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Armitage, scholar Guy Roberts has noted that Colin Powell was the only to have military experience, and presents a passage in which PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan attempts to differentiate between the policy positions of Powell and those of the neoconservatives in which Kagan characterizes Powell's approach as ruling out "almost every conceivable post-Cold War intervention". Some scholars have drawn attention to the influence of Albert Wohlstetter on the intellectual origins of PNAC. Alastair Finlan indicates that Wolfowitz had been a graduate student of Wohlstetter's, and states Wolfowitz along with other former proteges of Wohlstetter such as Richard Perle, for instance, would create a lobby group called "The New American Century" (PNAC), which espoused a neoconservative vision of the future. In discussing the PNAC report Rebuilding America's Defenses (2000), Neil MacKay, investigations editor for the Scottish Sunday Herald, quoted Tam Dalyell: "'This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war. These are the thought processes of fanaticist Americans who want to control the world.'" Sources which are not on point for PNAC, or which specifically violate BLP do not belong in the article - and I am exceedingly disappointed that I am now unable to actually remove the damn accusations of living persons being "draft dodgers" from an article. I suggest you read the reverts and insertion of BLP violations and material which is not directly related to PNAC but SYNTH connections of "the source says this about this person as an individual, so we can extend the argument to all of PNAC" etc. And note that the consensus on the article talk page was against such inclusion - especially since sources did not link PNAC as a group to having draft-dodgers be key players. Cheers. and try to do the right thing please! Collect (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC) Ubikwit has also posted at Talk:Dick Cheney iterating the criminal charge of draft-dodger, etc. and is specifically adding BLP violations on the PNAC article -- including such violations as saying specific people "studied under" the same person - which is blatant OR and SYNTH on his part, etc. He has a standing warning from Robert McClenon for his editing on BLPs and I suggest that instead of yelling at me for edit war where my edit summaries clearly noted the applicability of WP:BLP that you note Ubikwit's blatant and continued violations of policy. [25] and [26] more than adequately show his disdain for the policy on the Dick Cheney article. And his use of WP:CRYBLP as his excuse for such violations is wearing thin. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC) He has now posted that I can not remove BLP violations of all damn things! Collect You know that you are supposed to raise BLP claims at the BLP board after deleting text on the basis of a claimed violation of BLP. You need to start following that directive and stop making unilateral pronouncements on such matters.--Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 15:06, 11 March 2015 (UTC) Which is about as absurd as Kafka might wish. Read my post at WP:BLP/N. Saying that a person is a "draft-dodger" is a criminal charge. Sourcing it to a publication of AK Press does not work as that is not a "reliable source" under WP:RS. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:25, 11 March 2015 (UTC) Yup. Here I added references-tags to Collects's quotation, so they don't get adopted by another post on this page. LLAP, Dear ODear ODear trigger warnings 11:18, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Arbitration I mentioned you.[27] Dear0Dear 23:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC) Chealer's comments on archived AN3 I'd like to bring your attention to these edits: first edit, I reverted, and then Chealer restored. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Chealer clearly has a fundamental incapacity to be honest with himself or to recognize wrongdoing, I suspect he's just one of those people who needs to argue for the sake of argument. He apparently thinks he's perfect and that the block against him could only be the result of some perceived corruption, despite the fact that it was only imposed after he continued his behavior after being reported. It's an extreme case of irrationality the likes of which I've never witnessed before and at this point I'm not sure how to handle it. Yes, it's inappropriate to insert comments into an archived discussion, but all I can say is leave it, if he needs to have the last word so badly, whatever. I assure you the next time Chealer's behavior comes under administrator scrutiny, this whole episode will speak for itself, as he's clearly the only one who thinks there's nothing wrong here. Just try to move on, if issues with Chealer's behavior continue you're welcome to bring it to my/our attention again, either way I'll be happy to weigh in on the matter. In my experience though people will only get away with this sort of behavior for so long, he'll either have learned his lesson (despite not admitting to it) or he'll continue in the same manner and find himself in a worse situation. Swarm... —X— 03:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC) In my opinion you've offered plenty of rationale for the block at User talk:Chealer. If Chealer is still unconvinced by your explanation he should take his disagreement elsewhere. I warned him per the result of a previous 3RR case in 2012 but he professed not to understand the warning. EdJohnston (talk) 03:39, 17 March 2015 (UTC) (talk page stalker) From my own experience, I can only confirm that Chealer simply doesn't want to play nicely and tends to argue just for the sake of what seems to be his/her arguing focal point at the time; please see § Another discussion with Chealer above. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC) I just saw this discussion, after I reverted Chealer's reversion of EvergreenFir's revert at the 3RRN archive. I find inserting comments in archives, where editors cannot reply to them, because they are, umm, archives, to be really disruptive. By the way I fully agree with Swarm's lengthy and patient explanations to Chealer, although they were apparently a WP:WASTEOFTIME, given the attitude of the editor. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC) I have asked Bbb23, a 3RRN regular, to look into this case. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you all for the comments. I'll leave the archive edits be, but I am following the pages Chealer often edits and will be keeping an eye on them. I've lost good faith in this user. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC) The only thing I've done is left a clear warning on Chealer's Talk page that if they edit the archive again, they risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you for that Bbb, and good to see you! And thanks to the rest of you guys for weighing in, I definitely agree, and needed to hear another voice of sanity after all that. Not that I'm surprised, but it's become clear that this user has more of a history than I was even aware of when I imposed the block. In hindsight, I'm concerned it may have been too lenient considering the greater behavioral issues at play (they clearly remain unresolved). Then again, that's fine, just keep an eye out and we can revisit the issue if and when we need to. Swarm... —X— 19:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you very much Bbb23 for your help. My thanks also go to Swarm for persevering in his valid explanations for his block to the user, despite the obstacles. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 20:15, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Heck, look at that reply... It reminds me to those numerous illogical "I see nothing wrong there" / "can you explain why" / "your reasoning is wrong" responses I've seen from Chealer. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 23:11, 17 March 2015 (UTC) Bizarre. Swarm... —X— 03:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC) Thanks Thank you, a thousand times thank you! I greatly appreciate your help Swarm! AcidSnow (talk) 03:50, 19 March 2015 (UTC) No problem, figured I'd just make it easy on everyone. :) I commented on the AN3 report as well. Swarm... —X— 03:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC) Thank you. It wasn't intended to be at ANI but at the Edit War page. I think I wanted to say something else but I don't remember. AcidSnow (talk) 04:24, 19 March 2015 (UTC) Revdel please I saw you were active today at ANI, so I am coming to you with a request for revdel including edit summary. [28] Thank you in advance! Binksternet (talk) 21:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC) Done, and no problem! Thanks for bringing it up! Swarm... —X— 21:44, 20 March 2015 (UTC)