This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Doug Weller

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The current date and time is 9 September 2016 T 19:22 UTC.

User:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
home

Talk Page

Workshop

Site Map

Userboxes

Edits

Email

Notice Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first...
Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia.

If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
If I have not made any edits in a while, (check) you may get a faster response by posting your request in a more centralized place.



You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.

University of Kansas "Ancient Central America" course assignment[edit]

This is just a heads-up to let you know that I'm once again having students create Wikipedia entries for a course this semester. I've posted the information for them here:

User_talk:Hoopes#Wikipedia_Assignments_for_.22Topics_in_Archaeology:_Ancient_Central_America.22_at_KU_.28Spring_2016.29

Dwapara Yuga / Yoekteshwar[edit]

Hi Doug, I'm Robert ( RobCZ ) and I think the last correction must have been five years ago on the particular year we are in according to this interpretation of Yoekteshwar. Swami Yoekteshwar wrote his Holy Science in 194 Dwapara ( 1894 ), thus currently we are in 316 Dwapara. Kind regards Robert, Amsterdam, Holland

Referring to our convo regarding the mass-cross article bogus spamming by Freedom Wolfs[edit]

Regarding "Freeom Wolf" his rampant editorial pattern (see for our previous discussion regarding this; [1]), I'm afraid that another warning or notification simply ain't gonna help, given that he's still at it, spamming the same OR/non-RS nonsense in a frantic way on so many articles.[2] - LouisAragon (talk) 03:16, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

LouisAragon, I did say go to RSN. I'm happy to support you here but you've got to do the heavy lifting by going to RSN. Tell him you're doing that. Revert him, whatever, but I can't do the heavy lifting, no time for a start. Doug Weller talk 16:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I share LouisAragon's concerns over Freeom Wolf, and have in the past attempted to remove some of the very low-grade content he has been adding (such as spamming the repeated "the population is busy with gardening, farming, animal husbandry"-type stuff) - though there is so much of it I stopped doing it. Some of the claims, like villages of a few hundred people having libraries and secondary schools and hospitals, are unbelievable regardless of the Azeri source claiming them as true. His sources used for the meanings of place names in Azerbaijan (in particular Nakhchivan) seem pure propaganda, works produced to deny the Armenian past of most of these settlements. Other content he has added have presented Armenian monuments as Azeri ones. However I have not wanted to start an edit war by basically reverting everything he has added as soon as he adds it, even though the quality of the material he has been adding would justify such an action. The easiest solution might be to get the sources he is using for all this content be declared unsuitable. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Tiptoethrutheminefield I agree, which is why I've asked User:LouisAragon to go to RSN. He also doesn't know about WP:COMMONNAME. He's been given a DS alert so he can be taken to WP:AE if he continues to present Armenian monuments as Azeri ones, but he editors should be giving him warnings about this also. Doug Weller talk 13:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I will present it there in the near future. Will ping you both whenever. :-) - LouisAragon (talk) 13:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

AAP ka Lawyer[edit]

Above contributor is obviously a part of WP:LTA/IAC. Sitush (talk)]

@Sitush: Sorry, forgot about this. Not sure there is anything I can do here at the moment at least. Doug Weller talk 18:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Yom Kippur and Purrhaps[edit]

Hi, Purrhaps is back again and I'm not really sure how to go about dealing with those crazy edits. It might come to NOTHERE but someone is not getting what is being said. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph: Sorry, forgot to reply. I'm not sure either. They edit subjects I know little about. Frustrating. Doug Weller talk 18:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
No worries. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Checkuser[edit]

Could you run a quick checkuser for me, please? I have a probable DUCK sock of an indef blocked user and I need to confirm. The sock is Sjick14, the indef-blocked user is CaptainHog. SPI at the far bottom will have the most current IP and account information, of course. Also, could you check for any sleepers while you are at it? Diannaa usually handles these, but she is offline at the moment. Much appreciated. - NeutralhomerTalk • 13:06 on September 3, 2016 (UTC)

I filed an SPI related to the above request. Just letting you know. - NeutralhomerTalk • 15:25 on September 3, 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! - NeutralhomerTalk • 16:09 on September 3, 2016 (UTC)

Temple of Edfu[edit]

Hi Doug. Thank you to pay attention to Temple of Edfu article. Regarding my edit that was reverted, I do agree with you that there are many real good images to be show, but I don't think the article must be turned into a giant gallery, and there are pictures there that are placed in a very bad way, turning the article layout and diagramation awful. Finally, the image of the game is the only one that shows a restoration of the temple, so, I think that it deserves a place there. Regards, Sturm (talk) 20:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

In fact, that article needs more text and less images! ;) Sturm (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sturm: I agree there are too many images, but I thought you removed some of the best. As for the game image, how do we know the reconstruction was done by an expert on such temples? Doug Weller talk 20:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, talking about the fact of there are too many images, go on, please, select the best ones and reduce the number of images. As for the game image, you are right, we don't know how good/precise is that CG restoration. Anyway, I think that its still possible to show that image as a "free restoration", and indicate also that the temple is shown inside a computer game (a relevant info for itself). Regards, Sturm (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

heads up at Talk:Genesis creation narrative[edit]

Polentarion thinks that theology is an empirical, methodological science. Try reading through their comments on the page and you'll see that I'm not picking out the worst thing they've said, but a representative example. So yeah, that's who you're dealing with.

I'm not going to engage them anymore. I'm not advising you not to try, just making sure you're aware of whom you're arguing with. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 19:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

MjolnirPants - nice to know that you go adminshopping. I wondered why Doug seemed to ignore my comments respectively did some c&p of links without much reflection. Seems you smeared me, and I don't like that. Polentarion Talk 11:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Once again I don't understand some of what you've written - "ignore my comments respectively did some C&P of links without much reflection" seems to be missing some words and is of course just another silly attack on me. And it's not smearing to point out that writing that "theology is an emperical, methodological science" is, um - well he doesn't actually say much about it except that you've written worse. As a statement about theology it's misleading. There is an American tradition of empirical theology but that doesn't make all of theology empirical and certainly not a science as we understand science today (yes in the past it was described as a science, that's irrelevant. Doug Weller talk 13:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry to say, but you quoted the smear and ignored what I had been writing. The statement versus Mjölnir claimed that theology is scholarly and modern science is very much based on the heritage of theology, take the Merton Thesis. What is the problem? And why does Mjoelnir starts to preach (as in [3]) with inches of sermon about 18th century DWEM? I had been referring a) to Wissenschaft, less to science. German DFG currently spents 1.6 million € to evaluate that for the catholic case just in Bochum (the Emmy Noether http://www.theologie-als-wissenschaft.de/). Polentarion Talk 16:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Yom Kippur DR[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Yom_Kippur -- Purrhaps (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music)[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (music). Legobot (talk) 04:30, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

contents of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava[edit]

Hi Doug Weller,

I see there is an edit to the contents of this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava) at 08:01 on 1 September 2016‎ in the 'History' section. I tried undoing the edit on 3rd September. However, I think that was blocked by you.

Could you please let the changes in. The 'History' section had valuable information about the surnames of this caste.


13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)49.205.8.26 (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

No, they were copyright violations, I'll post a longer explanation to your talk page. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


Thanks Doug for the elaborate details about the policies. From your note, I understood that, the book which has the 'surnames list' has copyright violation issues and hence cannot be used.

However, I have many other sources, which give similar information. Let me know, how I can add the information to the Wikipedia page.

49.205.8.26 (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #225[edit]

Adding contents to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava[edit]

Thanks Doug for the elaborate details about the policies. From your note, I understood that, the source referred at "https://www.jstor.org/stable/604951?seq=15#page_scan_tab_contents" has copyright violation issues and hence cannot be used. However, this source doesnot have the 'surnames list' about which I am interested in. So I assume that putting back the surnames list doesnot cause any harm. Also, I have many other sources, which give list of such surnames/last names. Please help me in adding information to Wikipedia page and cite the reference.As of now the page is edit protected.

--Old note for your reference ---- Hi Doug Weller, I see there is an edit to the contents of this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathatha_Sri_Vaishnava) at 08:01 on 1 September 2016‎ in the 'History' section. I tried undoing the edit on 3rd September. However, I think that was blocked by you. Could you please let the changes in. The 'History' section had valuable information about the surnames of this caste.

13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)49.205.8.26 (talk) 13:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC) No, they were copyright violations, I'll post a longer explanation to your talk page. Doug Weller talk 13:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


---Adding above note for your reference------- 49.205.8.26 (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Armenian transliterations?[edit]

Hi Doug, what do you think about Armenian transliterations for figures that were not Armenian in origin (the Orontid dynasty) and lived during a time when it still would take about a millennium for the Armenian language to be actually attested (5th century AD) and on top of that to be written in that alphabet as well (also 5th century AD). There are multiple issues with this anachronistic fashion in my opinion. What's your take on it? - LouisAragon (talk) 13:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

They seem a pretty bad idea but I don't know if we have guidelines for them. Doug Weller talk 18:24, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) MOS:FORLANG says “If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence ….” So I guess it hinges on whether or not shared geography makes for a close-enough association of an ancient dynasty with a modern language. I would think not: for example we don’t provide the Egyptian Arabic for Ptolemaic dynasty, rather the Greek. If the native form of the name is unattested it should be left out; extended etymological discussion, including modern & variant forms, belongs in the article body.—Odysseus1479 20:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. That makes sense. Doug Weller talk 13:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016[edit]

Look familiar?[edit]

Saw a comment by a Norwegian IP over on Talk:White nationalism that seemed familiar. Found that their IP range has been commenting a long on white supremacy/Nazi stuff. This a known sock perchance, or just some rando user? Thought I'd ask you and your TPSs if they recognized it.

IP edits in the 37.253.* range. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

<tps>There was a blocked account that socked for a while from Bergen earlier in the year. This one geolocates to Oslo, but that's not conclusive one way or another. Acroterion (talk) 03:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
New edits at Talk:White genocide conspiracy theory are probably the same person, which increases the chance that it's blocked Olehal09, who originally created that article. Acroterion (talk) 17:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Doug pinged me about this, since I blocked Olehal09 a year ago, but I don't have any useful insight. As I vaguely recall, Olehal made it fairly easy by being an obvious racist. I don't know of any sock tells if they're being slightly less obvious this time. Also busy this week so can't look at the page myself. Sorry I can't be of any help. --Floquenbeam (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Artice revision (all the necessary details including the link and name of the article, aswell as the diff included in the body)[edit]

Dear Mr Weller,

First of I'd like to thank you for taking your time to read the message. Also, I'd like to apologize to you in advance for any typing mistakes that I made, as english is not my native language.

I'd like to disscuss more about the recent edits (changes) that I've made (which were reverted) on the following article. There have been many debates about the content found on the page not so long ago and many changes were made during last few months - even days, if you look at the View history tab.

Before I do start, if you'd allow me, I'd like to cite your revision page:

  1. Any edit that personally attacks someone or something. [1]
  2. Any edit that involves a person, place, or thing that is not especially important, or that does not provide enough information to positively identify the subject of the sentence or phrase.[1]

The first revision I've made was due to the lack of references and a lot of missunderstandings and inaccurate information (whereas, I wanted to point out that the whole "Controversey" tab was based on missleading/false positive newspaper/tabloid articles and claims). The references left in the controversey tab (where most of the text comes from), are all gone (removed from the online newspaper's due to the fact that were false accusations).


The references left are as follow (I'll post a link of each of those with an short summary):

http://pescanik.net/rektor-mica-baron-minhauzen-ili-kako-je-ministrov-mentor-zagubio-doktorat
  • This one is the only valid link, as it is the one that actualy do exist; mainly due to the fact that this online portal is based all arround gossips and (mostly!) false positive information and inaccurate claims that has something to do with controversies.
http://web.archive.org/web/20140909182703/http://inserbia.info/today/2014/06/breaking-megatrend-rector-mica-jovanovic-does-not-have-london-phd-minister/
  • The link provided is archived (old cached version of the website). As you can see it is prefixed with Web Archive that captures the old content that was removed from the Internet (not to name the reasons as I don't want to sound subjective on the matter).
http://web.archive.org/web/20140909182703/http://inserbia.info/today/2014/06/breaking-megatrend-rector-mica-jovanovic-does-not-have-london-phd-minister/
http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2014&mm=06&dd=12&nav_id=90654
  • This is the invalid link, with a deadend (the actual link doesn't take the visitor to the article it was referencing, as it was deleted long ago, but rather to the latest news from the politics category).
http://inserbia.info/today/2014/06/mica-jovanovic-resigns-over-fake-phd-claim/
  • This link, same as the previous ones, is from the Inserbia Info domain and its' content was removed. This one is not prefixed though, so it points to the deadend - 404 page.
http://www.alo.rs/vesti/aktuelno/mica-napustio-sam-sps-i-srbiju/67507
  • This link, as most of the others, is pulled from the archive (as the archive subdomain proves, when you visit the actual page). The web page is not a 404 link, but rather pulls the deleted article from the archive - http://arhiva.alo.rs/...
http://www.e-novine.com/entertainment/entertainment-vesti/109102-Spona-Tadievih-prepona.html


Also, as someone who resides in the same country as Mr Mića Jovanović., I'm totaly aware of the controversey that was going on, last year, but as you already saw from the listed, all the claims made were false positive and had certain political conotations during elections (in Serbia).


Once again I'd like to thank you Mr Weller, for your time and patience.


Awaiting for the feed back on the matter,

Sincerely NDojcinovic (talk) 23:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

RSN[edit]

Already pinged you, but just in case ping doesn't work (it bugs sometimes as you might have experienced), here is the RSN section I made. Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 00:03, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion input sought[edit]

Given your contributions to articles about white nationalism and white nationalists, there is a discussion currently at the talk page on the Nationalism template which may interest you. Thank you. Rockypedia (talk) 02:42, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Changed sourced text RE:Oath Keepers[edit]

Thanks for the change. I was looking for an "assault" and didn't see one. It was an odd altercation so I wasn't exactly sure how to characterize it. The initial version just seemed to sensationalize the incident. - jag7211 (talk) 12:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

John Naisbitt University[edit]

Respectable Sir,

I would like to propose locking of the article "John Naisbitt University". I think that article is targeted by ex-rector M. Jovanovic or his associates.

With kind regards

Miles O'Brien (M) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miles o'b (talkcontribs) 09:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

My MFD[edit]

Yeah... I have screwed something up big time.... and can't figure out how to undo it. Can you help?

My rational would be this: Talk sub-page is one huge WP:SYNTH vio... the page creator has a unique (original) take on the "13 families" (a sub-theory within the broader NWO theory). He created the sub-page to lay out the "evidence" supporting his original theory. While he does cite sources... he does so as "evidence", not verification. The problem is that he is the one making the connections, not the sources. Blueboar (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ a b reasons for article revision