User talk:Seddon/Archive 3

I'm a member of Wikimedia UK We are a group of local Wikimedians helping to create "a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". Love Wikimedia? Live in the UK? Donate, Volunteer, and Get Involved!

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Hi Seddon. I hope everything's good with you, and you come back fully some time soon. I know this mediation case has closed, but the participants still want some kind of resolution. I've spent a few hours reading through everything, and the only solution I can come up with is to block KingsleyMiller - his conduct seems to be causing all this, and he really isn't adding much of value to articles. This is a bit extreme, so I was wondering if you, as someone who has been involved in the mediation from a neutral perspective, could let me know what you think. Neıl 龱 18:13, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary version here. I'll leave the rest to you. Thanks a lot, and all the best with it. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 14:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Olympus Mons alt.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 06:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:C-17 aircraft over over the Blue Ridge Mountains 2005.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 06:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:NAS montage 3.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:NAS montage 2.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:NAS1.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Seddon, I do not have time to properly review it right now, but I will later this evening. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 18:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you might be interested in this. The June issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the newsletter, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:A NAS question.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I declare myself to be one! - check out this page - and WT:NTWW - to my eternal surprise, my version of iTunes now checks NotTheWikipediaWeekly for updates, and downloads the podcasts automatically!

I've dropped a note into User:Addshore as someone who might be able to help get the RSS feed up to date - but it won't be too much work once its done to keep it current... hooray!

cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 01:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify which version of the three you prefer? I'd like to promote this, but it's not clear which to promote. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your featured sound candidate gained a WP:CONSENSUS of support, and has been promoted. If you know of any other sounds worthy of featured status, please nominate them.

I have made sure the featured sound version is in the relevant articles. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Felix from ISS 03 sept 2007 1138Z.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 18, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-07-18. howcheng {chat} 23:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you signed up to help out with Wikimania. The best thing to do is to join this mailing list:

[1]

--cfp (talk) 13:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder, I've asked a question to make sure I understand the proposal correctly. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:20, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you... ...for participating in my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff 22:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Would you care to review the current situation at this article, and comment on whether or not the outcome of mediation has been properly applied? CJCurrie (talk) 22:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been in the long process of converting articles I'd improved over the years to GA class. I guess FAC would be the ultimate goal for all the articles, but work priorities are currently sidelining much wikipedia editing on my part during the past month, and likely will continue to sideline significant wikipedia editing through October. After I get back from a work trip, I could send it through FAC. That would be in a couple weeks. If you feel up to it, you could submit it sooner. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 17:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. your question, see Talk:Prem Rawat#Formal mediation. --Francis Schonken (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is my pleasure to announce that your nomination to become a member of the Mediation Committee has been closed as successful. I encourage you to place the Mediation Committee page and Wikipedia:Requests for mediation on your watchlist, as well as the open tasks template, which will be updated as new cases are accepted. You are also encouraged to join the Committee's internal mailing list; please email me directly so I can confirm your email before subscribing it. If you have any questions about how the Committee functions, please feel free to ask me. Congratulations!

For the Mediation Committee, Daniel (talk) 15:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I subscribed your @googlemail address for you. I think you just need to confirm it now. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 15:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome aboard! Anthøny 15:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whee!! :-D Xavexgoem (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I was going to try my hand with Featured Sounds. What conversion program do you use to get the files into .ogg format? Thanks, Enigma ^message 22:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Sheep club2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. My name is Aharon42. I saw on Nagle's talk page that back in May you were looking for someone with access to NexisLExis. I have access because I am doing Medical research with a proffesor at Emory University in Atlanta and I would be happy to to look things up for you. If you want to also just point the way to some articles that could be improved by doing literature searches just let me know. Im a new editor so any guidance or instruction you want to send my way would be greatly appreciated. Cheersaharon42 (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh - it was pretty darn close to an A1. If anyone objects to it, I'll treat it as a PROD and restore it - same deal if the author recreates it. But yeah, do be careful with Twinkle, because it assumes you click the correct option the first time. I screwed up more than one nomination before I was allowed to just delete them. Thanks for letting me know. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, any ETA on the election results? --Tango (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully later tonight. Seddσn ^{talk Editor Review} 17:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Apparently Gini and Andrew have already compared results and they match, so if you'll be done soon (assuming you agree with them), that should be it. Great news! --Tango (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the hold up? Did your maths not agree with Gini and Andrew's? --Tango (talk) 21:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How could you have POSSIBLY known what I did so fast? Are you really a bot in disguise? Cuz if you are, thats grounds for execution by firing squad in some countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.19.191.130 (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still no answer, hmm? In the words of that person from that show, "How rude!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.19.191.130 (talk) 19:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from [[{{{1}}}]], which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Joshriedel (talk) 18:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Seddon/SandboxNWT, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Seddon/SandboxNWT and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Seddon/SandboxNWT during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Jeffro77 (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your response. I originally saw the three user subpages of this article listed at Category:Jehovah's Witnesses literature a few days ago. User page articles shouldn't be referenced as articles. I left a comment on the Talk page of each of the users' articles, e.g. User_talk:Seddon/SandboxNWT (which you didn't respond to) on 28 September. Because Cfrito has not been actively editing for several months, I place a PROD tag on his subpage, and was subsequently advised by an admin that it should have had an MfD instead. Because I did not want to be accused of favouritism (because all three are in breach of the guideline), I placed an MfD for all three.--Jeffro77 (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: "I suggest putting in a request for clarification. Seddσn talk Editor Review 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)"

What is a "request for clarification", and to whom does one put it in? Geoffrey.landis (talk) 02:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for taking the case. I did the WP:3O DR which worked for a while, but then fell apart later on. I do MEDCAB myself, but thought it'd be better to let someone else have a go. For background, the 3O discussion is here. If I can be of any help, do let me know. Thanks! :) fr33kman -s- 14:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- I and another editor have been involved in a lengthy discussion on the talk page of the "medical degree" entry. We seem to be going over the same issues repeatedly, and I thought you might be able to lend a helpful third-party voice. Thanks! Lamaybe (talk) 01:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This site is very poorly sourced and extremely biased. I've placed recommended changes on the talk page, no one objected and I was proceeding with the changes. Where did I go wrong? 32.179.31.110 (talk) 19:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

geez I know how to pester, huh?! - drop me a line when the audio file is online, and I'll get it polished up and published :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 23:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seddon, Here is a link to more background information which may be helpful: -> Wikipedia:FTN#Medical_degree Myself and a couple of other editors have performed a cleanup of the article over the past couple of days, so hopefully the article is at least somewhat more compliant with Wiki NPOV policy. Thanks for your help with this issue! Jwri7474 (talk) 22:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your email is posted here as you requested: Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Clerks/Noticeboard — Rlevse • Talk • 02:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 36th and final NotTheWikipediaWeekly Come for the final episode under this name on Sunday, November 2. The whole episode will be about recapping and discussing previous episodes. I am hosting this and look forward to as many of the more experienced NTWW's come to this episode. Plus, we may get a new guest, but we'll see. Anyway, its tomorrow @ 20:00 UTC. Please come! Mitch32(UP) 12:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Clerks/Noticeboard#Workshop — Rlevse • Talk • 21:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think? :) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon. Thanks for the kind invitiation, but I don't use Skype, nor do I expect to in the forseeable future. fish&karate 13:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me as well for the invitation. I don't use Skype either, for various reasons, and in any case much prefer to use written text as a medium to communicate in, as opposed to oral communication. Hope the podcasts go well. If transcripts will be available afterwards, I'd be interested in reading them. Carcharoth (talk) 00:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the offer, however I have no access to a microphone system, so I am uncertain if I will be able to participate in this. Should I be able to do so, however, I would greatly appreciate knowing who is responsible for running the cast sessions; I have previously had some poor experiences with this program that have led me to be highly distrustful of certain users responsible for its operation. As mentioned on my candidate talk page, I also will not be very available over the course of the next week due to real life obligations. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am stepping down as a MedCab coordinator. I would like to invite you to become a MedCab coordinator. Are you willing to take the position? Vassyana (talk) 18:49, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further to our conversation, I serve you with the official notification. ;)
Please respond to the questions and sign off on the RfA at your leisure. I will then put it live.
AGK 17:52, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and you might want to archive your talk page.

Messy talk pages don't look great—and you're about to go on RfA. ;-)

AGK 17:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck, Seddon! :-) –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best wishes for your RFA -- Tinu Cherian - 05:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Where is the dispute taking place?

• Briefly, what's the problem?

• ...What's keeping it from being solved?

• ...What do you want fixed?

<!-- optional -->

• How about a limerick or haiku? Code? Drawing?

<!-- You can remove the above -->

I rather like it :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 05:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

here it is :-)

I'll probably put it on my candidate page at some point too - and look forward to hearing the others :-) Privatemusings (talk) 06:23, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for the offer, but I don't possess a computer reliable enough to hold a meaningful skype conversation. Please do post any questions that occur to you on my questions page. BillMasen (talk) 21:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Seddon, just wanted to make sure that you're aware of the remaining questions at your RfA. Best of luck, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, I have closed your Request for Adminship as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Well deserved! –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Grats! :) Durova^Charge! 20:45, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adulations! Well done. ;-) AGK 20:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! The Helpful One 20:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yippee! PhilKnight (talk) 21:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, indeed! Ecoleetage (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*and there was much rejoicing* Yay! Daniel (talk) 02:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you record this Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly/Episode 14? Do you know where to find it or should this be declared lost and removed from the archives?

Congrats on adminship. Zginder 2008-12-01T22:45Z (UTC)

Skype me when you can :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 01:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon. I have removed your rollback flag since all administrators have rollback. Regards, Deskana (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon. I have removed your rollback flag since all administrators have rollback. Regards, Xavexgoem (talk) 01:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hrm. …

Needless user flags, anybody? ;-)

AGK 01:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:C-17 aircraft over over the Blue Ridge Mountains 2005.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 24, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-12-24. howcheng {chat} 00:30, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had no clue this would affect you. I should've talked to you first. I meant no harm to you whatsoever, and I apologize from the bottom of my heart. You know I mean it. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose. I'm one of those people that needs an absolute restart: I clear out my watchlist, I archive my discussions, I close my cases, and I'm just Xavexgoem again if you get me. Occasionally, I'll do something rash like hand in my bit. I've brought World of Warcraft characters up to pretty high levels and just deleted them. I like to start over, sometimes. FWIW, Durova has a pool running on how long it will take me to run back begging for the tools ;-) Xavexgoem (talk) 19:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Moon transit of sun large.ogv is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 2, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-01-02. howcheng {chat} 19:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the chance. I'll try not to piss it away this time. Sceptre ^(talk) 03:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Final_Fantasy_Legend_name_translation_woes.2C_mk._II

There is an ongoing issue with Kung Fu Man over an edit dispute which is getting out of hand, and I'm fairly certain the user is relying on sockpuppets to make revisions to the article. Check the revision history yourself to verify this. Also, I've been receiving harassing comments and threats from this user and am not sure where to turn for help. Please get involved and try to act as the voice of reason. Thank you. 74.242.123.2 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a CU done, you need evidence, not "fairly certain". — Rlevse • Talk • 02:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted a case to the mediation Cabal and for whatever reason it has been several weeks with no response thi is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2009-01/Family_Foundation_School if you can facilitate the process it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!CoreEpic (talk) 22:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)CoreEpic[reply]

Hello, On behalf of the concerned parties in the mediation case of The Man Who Would Be Queen. I know that none of you have to accept our case. I felt that asking all of you would be the best first approach. If you have any interest in mediating for us, or not, please indicate this on the talk page of the mediation case. If you are outright interested, want to mediate this case, and need no other convincing then please indicate that as well and we can get the ball rolling. If not we will not bother you anymore. Thankyou. --Hfarmer (talk) 08:19, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I may add to what Hfarmer wrote above, we very much need your help. As a group, we have had an enormous number of disputes on a set of related pages, and parts of this dispute have even put WP in The New York Times. The pages themselves remain an embarrassment to WP, and I hope you can help us solve our long-standing impasse for our own good as well as for WP's.

I can’t imagine what you or any other mediator uses in deciding which cases to take. I can’t say that the specific issues we need help addressing are novel (COI, incivility, etc.); however, I do have some confidence that most people would find the subject matter rather engaging. Such issues include the nature of transsexuality, the controversies between how (some) scientists describes transsexuality versus how (some) transsexual activists describe transsexuality, a book on the topic that immediately became wildly controversial, and the individual activists and scientists involved (some of whom participate here), all of which became quite ugly. The most complete (yet brief) description of where we now stand (in my opinion) is here.

Thank you for your attention, and I hope you can help us to resolve this wide-ranging problem.

— James Cantor (talk) 14:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged this image as unsourced, there is a source of Jumbo's face, but the pirate photo it's pasted into remains unsourced. --Sherool (talk) 20:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be delighted to help however I can. What sort of contributions are you hoping for? I'm a Balliolite myself, and Balliol is probably the perfect location for Wikimedia residents and I can perhaps surmise they would be very willing to take the Wikipedian visitors as residents as part of their Conference scheme. The college is always looking for ways to make money. How can I help. specifically?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 19:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I saw you listed over at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status as not having any students right now. Not sure how busy you are, but if you have the time would you be willing to help me gear up for an eventual RFA? If you can't right now, I completely understand, but any thoughts on my editing would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks! Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 21:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 61 support, 3 oppose, and 1 neutral I appreciate your oppose support! Cheers. Nja247 19:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are listed as an active participant in WikiProject Meteorology, WikiProject Severe weather, and/or WikiProject Non-tropical storms. I have made a proposal to start an official assessment page for these three projects, under the WP:METEO banner. Since this would need significant participation to work properly, I'd like input from as many interested parties as possible (even those who may not watch the project pages), so please visit the discussion here and leave your thoughts/opinions. Thanks! -RunningOnBrains 02:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Sheep club2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 30, 2009. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2009-03-30. howcheng {chat} 23:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. If you think it needs protection, go ahead. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 20:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the number of 4RR violations is shooting up! I guess you're right about full protection. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 20:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put up a request to get the list of largest empires fully protected but you have fully protected it with the wrong info. I have given sources, images and i have explained to people why they are wrong. And even more so the information on he page actually contradicts with another wikipedia page! the info is wrong please let me change it bck to correct info and then you may lock it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobbobbob12345 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you set up an RfC or follow some DR. No matter what version I protect it will always be the Wrong Version. Seddσn ^talk 13:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Trop logo copy.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:33, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This comment concerned me—it's disappointing to hear about substandard conduct at FAC. I hope you didn't experience anything over the top. The people there are usually very courteous. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, would 86.132.128.230 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS) happen to be you? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is :) Seddσn ^talk 23:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Seddon. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Editor review/Dylan620 (2). Cheers, and happy editing! Sincerely, Dylan620 _{Efforts · Toolbox}.

This message was sent to you at 00:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC). (I've answered your questions.)

Hello Mr. Seddon! James Humphreys from the AGM here, how goes things? We were talking at the board meeting about a couple of topics, and I thought it best to leave a note about them. First up was the ongoing RFC on the International Space Station article, which is at Talk:International Space Station#RfC: British English versus American English for this Article, which you suggested could possibly got for Mediation? Second was my lack of ability to join the IRC chats and get Huggle, etc., to work due to uni firewall restrictions, which you said I could possibly get around through ports, and finally was your suggestion that I get involved in Med Com?

Many thanks for your advice today, looking forward to working with you! Colds7ream (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't have a "Sound of the Day" notification template because we don't really have that on the Main Page, but this is just to let you know that File:Marching in.ogg will be bundled with Template:POTD/2009-05-09 for a day in the sun. howcheng {chat} 03:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seddon, I have posted a 'split and merge' proposal on the talk page [2] I think that this will address some of the underlying issues that have prompted the latest edit warring that required your intervention. Obviously involved editors should first have the opportunity to engage in discussion of the proposal but I wanted to check with you regarding the appropriateness of posting the proposal for RfC, while the article is still under protection. The recent arbcom case identified the need for previously univolved editors to become engaged with improving the Rawat connected articles - an RfC would be one way to encourage that, however I would welcome your comments before I go ahead. Thanks, --Nik Wright2 (talk) 15:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seddon, I appreciate your efforts to achieve a compromise over the former followers section of the teachings of PR article. However, Ted Patrick is a convicted criminal - kidnapping, assault, rape - who attempts to justify his criminality within the book you list as a source. By any objective measure his views are extremist, and widely regarded as such. The book and its author are questionable sources[[3]], therefore, not acceptable as sources for that article. Moreover, there are only two "scholars" ( Conway and Siegelman, populist writers actually) who endorse his methods, possibly three if you count Singer - not "several scholars" and their theories have been debunked by numerous researchers who subsequently investigated their claims[4].

I am not a member of any religious group or cult. This is a civil liberties issue, perhaps only marginally related to the Rawat teachings. Please remove the material you have added. Its inclusion is a violation of Wikipedia policy.Zanthorp 13:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanthorp (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your advice, and also the humorous note :)

Please see questionable sources[[5]] "publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions" are questionable sources.

Patrick[[6]] is a questionable source because his views are widely acknowledged as extremist and they rely largely on personal opinions. As a questionable source, its use as a source in the TofPR article contravenes policy. Patrick is a convicted criminal whose 'professional' activities included kidnapping, assault and rape. He has been condemned by scholars (sociologists mostly), civil libitarians, and various religious writers.

Here's an example, "Numerous testimonies by those who were subjected to a deprogramming describe how they were threatened with a gun, beaten, denied sleep and food and/or sexually assaulted (Barker 1989; Kilbourne and Richardson 1982). But one does not have to rely on the victims for stories of violence: Ted Patrick, one of the most notorious deprogrammers used by CAGs (who has spent several terms in prison for his exploits) openly boasts about some of the violence he employed (Patrick 1976)" [7]

Here are some more examples.

[8] :[9]

[10] :[11] :[12]

Material from Patrick's book is contentious to say the least. I advocate that editors discuss it before including material from it in the article and include it only if consensus has been reached. --Zanthorp (talk) 03:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've taken over from Steve on the corrib gas mediation. Any idea of a schedule on it? thanks GainLine ♠ _♥ 19:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, there's a proposed replacement. wadester16 20:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you felt it necessary to protect this page? As far as I can tell, there have only been 2 blp violations in the past 2 months, and the most recent one was nearly 24 hours ago; they were both also relatively isolated incidents and were reverted quickly. I see no need for the page to be protected. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, that makes sense. I have the page on my watchlist, and I think another admin does as well, so I think we should be ok...but if the vandalism does get back I'll keep that in mind and see that it gets protected. Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain to me how File:Energizer logo.svg and its Commons' version are different? Are you talking about the "®"? I can add it back just so you can say they are the same file but I will only revert it once the file here is deleted. --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 04:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I changed it for you. Can you please delete the local version now? --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 04:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe I had your talk/user page watched for a second and I saw you block yourself lol nice. --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 05:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heya. I noted you did a keep on the above AFD. Not contesting it, but what was your rationale for keeping the article? Curious, --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're in good company.[13][14] Durova^Charge! 20:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I no longer feel guilty for spoiling your block log so long ago. ;-) AGK 11:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seddon. I noticed you've put the closing tag on the AFD. Do you realize it's been less than six and a half days, and it was just closed early and reverted by Daniel a few hours ago, with several editors expressing on his talk page and in the AFD that this discussion should run the full seven days? لennavecia 23:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I shouldn't be surprised that someone read that muddled, no consensus AfD and deleted it anyway, but I am. Maybe I'm just an eternal optimist, but I thought that any reasonable person reading that AfD would admit that there was no consensus to be found there. I guess I was wrong. Unitanode 00:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Oh wait, I just noticed that Seddon is from the UK, so this must have been a delete-then-go-to-bed close. What a way to for me to be initiated into AfD. Unitanode 00:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rarely go to bed at 2 in the morning. Add a few more hours on and youll about right. Seddσn ^talk|^WikimediaUK 00:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd go with a delete on this one too, but the seven days period should be respected, especially in this situation. Two admins have already closed this and self-reverted, btw. I personally don't bother for a dozen of hours, but we'll be lucky if it doesn't go to DRV, and this argument could have been avoided. Oh, and as I noticed this, per WP:SIG, signatures shouldn't contain external links. Regards, Cenarium (talk) 01:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know you'll probably get flack for this close, but I just wanted to say that I agree with your closing rationale. And I think you're pretty gutsy to be the closing admin. Best, Steve Crossin ^Talk/_{Help us mediate!} 01:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse. I know from experience that the extra few hours aren't likely to make a difference. I think your closure was perfectly reasonably, though I am biased as I voted in the discussion. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I guess when an admin makes a controversial close you agree with, it's "gutsy" or "perfectly reasonable." I still don't understand how anyone could divine anything remotely RESEMBLING "consensus" from that quagmire, though. But now that it's deleted -- if I understand DRV right -- you all have successfully shifted the burden of proof to those arguing that the article should exist. This seems patently unfair, but I won't be participating there, as this whole thing has left a very sour taste about the whole AfD process in particular, and Wikipedia in general. Unitanode 01:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. JN466 01:32, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't know quite how to respond to this close. On the one hand, closing early was a fantastically bad idea (the fact that people who favored deletion are saying so above should make that all the more clear). Moreover, your close rational makes very little sense given that BLP1E rules out articles on people, not articles on subjects (indeed, BLP1E is precisely what favors this sort of article rather than an article about the individual). On the other hand, you are correct that the general consensus favored deletion and that a few more hours would not change the result. I'm therefore not going to take this to DRV. I would however urge you to replace your closing rational with reasoning closer to or identical with Daniel's earlier close which is much more well thought out. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with Joshua on this one. Clearly the consensus was to delete. However, as noted in the AFD, BLP1E does not and cannot apply to this article. NOT#NEWS is more applicable and, as Joshua points out, something along the lines of what Daniel wrote to help explain how consensus works for those who can't seem to grasp it. لennavecia 04:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your feedback. I have linked to daniel's close, and clarified the close. It was a misread on my part. Hopefully this will alleviate any concerns. Seddσn ^talk|^WikimediaUK 06:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That's a much better close. Thank you also for taking the effort to close a very controversial discussion. JoshuaZ (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, Seddon. Thanks for clarifying. لennavecia 15:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kaldari has proposed a replacement image. Please consider updating your !vote. wadester16 04:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You commented on my nomination at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hawaii Bathymetry, I have made changes to the image and would appreciate a revisit as the nomination is closing soon. Thanks. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 23:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NuclearWarfare has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

In the case you endorsed you only use the self-endorse if you open the case yourself. In this case you would just type endorse in the template. Thanks! Icestorm815 • Talk 02:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He added the request for checkuser template himself, though he did not file the case. So in that situation he should use the "self" parameter. — Jake Wartenberg 03:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops my mistake! :) I skipped over the edit where you added it. D'oh! :p Icestorm815 • Talk 03:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Seddon,

I do not know if your personal beliefs fall towards inclusionist or deletionist but I know I wouldn't write an article if I felt it was even bordering on notability issues because I wouldn't want to volunteer several days of my time researching and writing if it was going to evaporate. As you know 90+ percent of articles here on living people like media professionals, singers, atheletes, etc. can also be called into question and easily be picked apart in afd. And I definitely like the subject material, I wouldn't be on here editing differential equations.

I met the director once at UT and felt he was wikipedia notable and being an editor wanted to write one and expand knowledge on the subject to other film lovers. He told our class about all the superbowl ads he shot and working with weird al and peter o'toole and all these guys so I just had to write an article about him. A lot of these influential guys tend to stay under the radar so I had to go to imdb at first to write his bio but google scholar also helped and I'm definitely working on finding newer and better sources. If you'll help me by taking off the deletion tag, I will look for more bullet proof sources using all the University of Texas databases when I get some free time from summer work. It would really sadden me if all my work researching and writing went down the drain when I never even thought notability would come into question.

Per WP:CREATIVE

• The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.

He has directed two feature length theatrically released films. I've always seen any director that has managed to get theatrical distribution on million dollar films with real working actors like simon baker as notable.

• The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.

All the wierd al videos, superbowl ads, and two feature films plus producing a major release like Basic.

• The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant libraries.

C - His newest film was the closing night film at slamdance, he has a bunch of industry awards for his commercials plus there is all of this golani brigade Israeli stuff from when he was young before he became a director.

Andman8 (talk) 15:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you're doing it wrong. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've filed an appeal against an editing restriction I recently received over at AE. I consider the restriction extremely harsh given the minor nature of the infractions I may have committed. I would welcome any comments or other input.radek (talk) 22:26, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you are taking mediation, consider this a warning. Stay off my talk page. Law _{type! snype?} 11:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed that you closed this RfA early, but I would like to cast my opinion please, and would be grateful if you could re-open it. Thanks. Johnfos (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think there was a problem with closing it (yes, it meets WP:NOTNOW). But I do think to may have closed it incorrectly. You should have talked to the candidate before closing it, partly per WP:NOTNOW, and partly to give them a chance to withdraw it themselves. I can't find you doing this (although I may have overlooked something), in future please keep this in mind. Cheers :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 09:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good good, that's fine, closing like that is always to keep the user out of harms way, and closing that there was a good idea. Bu yeah, checking is a good idea. Happy editing :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 18:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's very nice of you to appreciate my on-wiki comments. I'm not sure if it's your auto-quit message, but would you mind removing it if it is? ;) iMatthew ^talk at 21:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mediation here seems to be coming along very slowly or is even stalled at this point. There hasn't been huge input from parties involved and User:Lapsed Pacifist hasn't even been active in the last 3 weeks [15]. Meanwhile problem articles remain "locked". With your permission I would like to seek input from the community on these articles starting with Rossport Solidarity Camp. This article is based on indymedia articles that were written by members of the camp. At the very least it doesn't meet standards set by WP:SPS and is also possibly WP:SOAP. I think an AFD nomination on this would allow the community to decide on what should be done with it. Cheers GainLine ♠ _♥ 11:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]