Jump to content

User talk:SpacemanSpiff/Archives/2013/November

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


Rewritten text for UIDAI

Please find below the rewritten text for the disputed copyvio. I await further examples of my vios.

According to Anupam Saraph, the UIDAI and its agencies bear no liability in law for criminal offences or privacy breaches effected under the scheme wherein the entire information, including biometric information, is processed by foreign corporates. As the UID scheme combines all a citizen's identifiers within a single number, UID misuse singularly exposes citizens to "unprecedented risk" when failure of a biometric verification results in individuals being disentitled from government benefits until the citizen is re-enrolled, a process controlled by politicians and bureaucrats.Notabede (talk) 18:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

This looks ok. I'm not here to provide you further examples, I've already told you that there's a lot more. Look through your contributions. —SpacemanSpiff 06:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I cleaned up all my contribs. 8 days waiting for a clerk is outrageous for such a "High Importance" article. I'm waiting 24 hours then setting the page to a rewritten version. Please watch the article if you can.12:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notabede (talkcontribs)

Please look into the edits over the past few days. Can we restrict edits to autoconfirmed users.Notabede (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chirayu Amin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Rajesh Khanna image

I have uploaded File:RajeshKhanna.jpg, cropped version of image originall uploaded by you. But can't link it to Rajesh Khanna as lead section is too long for my browser. I think this is better image with his smile. Will you pls help me to link it to the article? Thanks. Abhi (talk) 15:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

The top 10 encapsulates the history of human aviation; at #1, a Google Doodle celebrating the 216th anniversary of the first parachute jump; at #10, the enduringly popular scifi film Gravity, a paean to human spaceflight. It's odd to think it's taken us 200 years to travel about that many miles up.
While giving a speech on behalf of a gubernatorial candidate, Paul advocated his pro-life position, and compared allowing unrestricted abortions to the film Gattaca. He went on to use strikingly similar language and phraseology in his speech to what the Wikipedia page reads. The Washington Post's article conceded that Wikipedia is a widely used source for trivial information, but mocked the fact that a politician would view it as a reliable source.
In January we raised several potentially troublesome issues for the Wikimedia movement in taking on Wikivoyage, including the apparent inadequacy of the English Wikivoyage sex-tourism policy, hurriedly strengthened against mention of child sex after our inquiries. However, both sex-tourism and illegal-activities policies remain equivocal about how the site should treat entries about sex tourism more generally, and drugs that are classed as illicit in almost every country. Yet the Signpost has found it remarkably easy to locate material in Wikivoyage that violates both the spirit and the letter of the policies.
This year's WikiCup competition has finished, while three articles, five lists, and six pictures, were promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia last week.
Laura Stein, a researcher at the University of Texas at Austin, has concluded that, based on her comparison of user policy documents (including the Terms of Service) of YouTube, Facebook and Wikipedia, Wikipedia offers the highest level of participation power overall.
With Halloween, the Day of the Dead, and other gloomy celebrations this week, we're taking a look at Wikipedia's dead and dying. For some dead WikiProjects, the sole purpose of their life was simply to serve as a warning to others. Some of these projects may still be salvageable, but for most, a revival is unlikely. Here are some projects that never got off the ground and the lessons that can be gleaned from their follies

Unique Identification Authority of India

Spiff the users here a novice users and are new and don't have proper understanding of policies. Don't block them immediately instead try to reason with them to make them understand. Some of them might be involved with serious things including Sockpuppetry and Edit Warring. Sohambanerjee1998 15:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

BH copyvios

Hi! Your timing of taking break is perfect. The BH copyvio issue is boiling. There might start a larger discussion on the wholesale case. Will link it here whenever it starts. Request you to take out some time and join it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:18, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

As part of the second major "outing" controversy to hit the English Wikipedia in less than a year, the Chelsea/Bradley Manning naming dispute was dragged into the spotlight yet again when the English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee ruled by motion to remove the administrator tools from and ban long-time Wikipedia contributor Phil Sandifer.
It's fair to say that commemorating death was a strong theme this week, with Lou Reed's passing generating interest, as well as a Google Doodle celebrating the costume designer Edith Head. And of course, the world's greatest celebrations of the dead, Halloween and the Day of the Dead, were also popular this week.
HMS Hood, one of the most famous warships of the Second World War, was a battlecruiser and therefore part of what is now the largest featured topic on Wikipedia: "Battlecruisers of the world". The topic was promoted to "featured" status on the English Wikipedia last week alongside eleven articles, three lists, four pictures, and two other topics.
This week, we spent some time with WikiProject Accessibility, a project that strives to make Wikipedia accessible for users with disabilities. The project improves Wikipedia's guidelines and Manual of Style, collects useful templates and scripts, and provides support to impaired Wikipedians.
The Ebionites 3 case has closed with an interaction ban for the two editors involved in the dispute.
Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include...

Precious

Flag of India
Thank you for quality articles about Indian topics, the Flag of India, women cricketers, Gods, Demons and Others and R. K. Narayan, for fighting vandalism, for speaking up for content and the personalities behind it, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

The numbers this week are beyond anything that has been seen since this report began. The top view count beats the average by an order of magnitude. Usually the appearance of numbers this big on the list is due to spamming, but in this case it seems they are due to honest interest; more specifically, Google Doodles, which for the first time claimed all five top slots. This column has raised numerous times the power of a Google Doodle to shine light on Wikipedia, but the wattage has never been as high as this.
Five articles, two lists, one topic, and nine pictures were promoted to 'featured' status on the English Wikipedia last week.
The supporting staff of the Wikimedia Foundation’s powerful volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) have released their assessments for the third half-yearly round of funding applications. The applications for the newly named annual plan grants were submitted by affiliated entities on 1 October, and comprise a total of more than US$5M in bids.
The Italian-language Wikipedia community has overwhelmingly voted to request the Wikimedia Foundation's assistance in recovering wikipedia.it, a website that has been frequently confused with the Italian Wikipedia.
This week, we followed the intricate storylines of WikiProject Soap Operas.
Current discussions on the English Wikipedia include...

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

As I said in August, contributing to the Signpost can be one of the most rewarding things an editor can do. The genre is refreshingly different from that of Wikipedia articles, and can allow writers to use a different range of skills. The need for an independent, volunteer-run Signpost continues to grow, given the increasing complexity and financial expenditures of the global Wikimedia movement, not to mention the English Wikipedia.
Peter Burke's A Social History of Knowledge: Volume II: From the Encyclopédie to Wikipedia is a broad and wide-ranging look at how knowledge has been created, acquired, organized, disseminated, and sometimes lost in the Western world over the last two and a half centuries, a sequel to his 2000 book covering the prior three centuries, A Social History of Knowledge: From Gutenberg to Diderot.
Four articles, five lists, and thirty-four pictures were promoted to 'featured status' this week, including an image of a small fraction of the 18,000 taxis that serve Hong Kong.
This week, we headed over to WikiProject National Football League. With 10 Featured Articles, 61 Featured Lists, and 142 Good Articles (as of publication), this WikiProject has done a lot of work improving American football articles.
The Wikimedia Foundation has sent a formal cease and desist letter to Wiki-PR—the public relations agency accused of breaking Wikipedia policies and guidelines by creating, editing, and maintaining several thousand articles for paying clients through a sophisticated array of accounts. The Foundation's attorneys, Cooley LLP, have demanded that Wiki-PR's employees abide by the site's Terms of Use and the language of a community ban from the English Wikipedia.
It's not hard to guess which event is leading interest in the top 25 this week. The sheer scale of Typhoon Haiyan is staggering; estimates place its maximum windspeed upon first landfall in the Philippines on November 6 at 315 km/h, which would make it the most powerful tropical cyclone ever to reach land. To date, the storm has killed nearly 4000 people and damaged or destroyed nearly 4 million homes.
Back in March, when the March 25 Arbitration Report covered the Audit Subcommittee appointment discussion, a statement from the WMF legal division clarified its position that access to deleted revisions required an RFA or RFA-identical process; therefore AUSC committee appointments were not open to non-admins. The WMF legal team has now further clarified its position, saying that running for and winning an election for arbitrator would qualify as the type of rigorous community selection process required for the checkuser and oversight rights held by arbitrators.

Hey spiff!

Hi Spiff! can you please protect my user page? It has been subject to retaliation again? Although the user has been indeffed I don't want someone other to edit my page (other than autoconfirmed) again (ever). Plus if my page cannot be protected on vandalism grounds I want you to consider my request as that of one in userspace per WP:UPROT. Sohambanerjee1998 09:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Using different language query

Hi, I have been trying to edit some pages in Hindi Wikipedia but the supported citations or URL's are very less (of the topic in Hindi language searching) in number in comparison to the same topic in English searching. My question: is it fair to support English or other language URL's and citations for editing in Hindi Wikipedia, and if yes then up to what extent? Please elaborate. Thanking for your co-operation. Work2win (talk) 14:26, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

@Work2win: Hi! SpacemanSpiff is away on a break since long. To answer your question, you may use as many non-Hindi sources as are required to make the content verifiable. The core thing is that content should be verifiable even if not all users can verify it. We do allow references which require special access permissions on web or offline books also. Same with non-Hindi sources. In case someone challenges the content, you can always ask some uninvolved editor to get the content verified. And being English, there would be plenty editors to help out in verification. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)