User talk:Sir Joseph/Archive 8

2768:

which you took offence has been removed, and I unabashedly and wholly apologise for it if it came off as offensive. I feel that the air between us has been unnecessary hostile, and this is something which I wish to remedy. We may have differing viewpoints with relation to the election, but that is not a justifiable reason for us to squabble endlessly. While I do not intend to support you in your pursuit of a role as an arbitrator for a litany of well-documented reasons, I also do not want to make you feel attacked and put upon - I can unequivocally state that this was never my intention. You are unquestionably entitled to your religious beliefs, and should fight for that right. I am not an antisemite, and your status as a Jew does not bother me. So, while I will not rescind my criticisms, I will unequivocally apologise if you were aggrieved and felt that my comments were antisemitic, and will cordially extend an olive branch to you. I did wrong. I am sorry. I do not want to continue the lack of civil discourse between us. Are you willing to accept the olive branch,

2565:

I only sought an answer, and may have gone overboard in seeking it. With this in light, I would like to ask that you revert your decision to remove my secondary question from the question section, as it deserves to be there in my view. If, as you alluded to, you removed it to spare me from coming off negatively from the interaction, I can inform you that I don't share such concerns - much like yourself, I believe that I should stand by what I have said. If you wish, you can strike out the question, but I would request that you reinstate it nonetheless on the page rather than purging it with a tool intended for vandalism, which my query was not. I am asking here rather than reverting directly so as to prevent an edit war with the three reverts rule. I believe that the question should remain visible, I stand by my concerns and am satisfied that you answered, and I feel that they should be reinstated ergo. If you would kindly see to this, I will be happy to let the matter stand.

2804:

you use thag fact in an argumentative manner. I am not an antisemite - there is little more that I can say in that regard. The conment on the guide stands as it is accurate. I dislike the terminology of the card, but the fact that you are already attributing your campaign's shortcomings to systematic bias is problematic, and frankly, insulting. I am not saying that you cannot be proudly Jewish. However, don't assume that everyone who opposes you does so on religious grounds, because they don't. I don't. Our argument stemmed from an act of bad faith on your behalf, and construing innocent comments as antisemitic is a continuation of that bad faith. I stand by the critique, which is divorced from religion entirely. In the spirit of civility, I will in fact amend it to reflect this, so as to mend the discourse between us, but the advice to not assume the world is out to get you is still kindly given.

4110:

out that calling something a shitty country is just that, it doesn't make one racist. Furthermore, this is more of the willy-nilly enforcement of civility. People tell me to fuck off, but that is not enforced, making a general vague term about other countries in general and suddenly the cavalry comes out? Shitty countries is just the impolite way of saying Third World Countries. I also think you shouldn't be threatening editors. This is why I keep on saying Knowledge (XXG) is such a toxic environment. And this is why I, and others, just keep taking pages off watchlists. However, I am glad to know that should I find myself the victim of uncivil comments, you would be ready to take action to enforce Knowledge (XXG)'s policies on civility.

3375: 3326: 288:. When I edit those university pages, I was not under the impression it fell under ARBPIA (I did not get a warning for some reason unlike when I do on wiki pages that do involve the conflict). This seems to really constrain what actual Palestinians can edit their page which feel's extremely limited. Second, majority of the countries do see Palestine as sovereign, this is not an opinion, its a fact, so I am going with the majority here and not placing my own opinion or biased views. 3319: 3312: 4574: 3779: 2936: 1725: 1270: 873: 346: 2652:

see your name there. Have you recently suffered some head trauma? Who did you imagine would vote for you after literally years of open hostility from the administration to people like us? Were you surprised that someone on the "other site" warned everyone you're a Jew? Were you surprised that nobody called him on it? Anyhow, good luck. I'd appreciate it if you could ping me on my talk page when the elections are over, I'd like to see how many votes you get.

4981: 2669:, and as I mentioned on the discussion page, I did ask people for their opinions to see if it wasn't just me. What I find even more troubling is that in several guides they write that I throw out the antisemitism card, which is not true and insulting. I have been told by others that the comments are troubling but there's nothing to be done about it. I know I won't win, but I prefer to lose because of my edits or qualifications, not because of my religion. 3160: 31: 3517: 4021: 3120: 3924: 2475: 3707: 3334: 4581: 3700: 4280:

problematic users are sanctioned for wasting more and more and the community's time and preented from doing so I suppose). I'd just add a cite (one's already been provided at the AE listing), and then the case has precisely zero weight. Indeed, probably less because the proposer did nothing to resolve the situation before going the whole drama hog.

1904:

add would be possibly lost forever. I left a request on the sandbox page so maybe you can work with it but I'm psychologically unfit to face a complete rejection like that, after the time I put in. I actually have to make myself leave Knowledge (XXG) due to it even though that definitely wasn't your intention. Best of luck.

2157:

less what I've been doing until now. If this was real life, I would have consulted an good attorney. But perhaps you will be kind enough to offer some pointers, or point me to to the Wikipeida version of black letter law as it applies to defendants in the dock at ANI, and the etiquette of BOOMERANG. Gratefully,

2352:

came off as anti-them? They would get an apology and the comment would be edited. And to all my stalkers out there, I never said the person is an antisemite, I said the comment was perceived as antisemitic and I have communicated with a few other people to get their feelings and 90% of the people agreed with me.

4109:

It's quite apparent you haven't been reading the talk page if you suddenly decide now to enforce civility. Furthermore, we are discussing Trump's comments about shitty countries, and someone called Trump a racist for saying that, which is more of a violation if you ask me. I have every right to point

2818:

for some reason I think you have a misunderstanding of why I said a certain comment was antisemitic. I also never said people who opposed me are antisemitic. I also never raised that issue with will the criticism. I raised it with one comment I, and many others, perceived as antisemitic. I also never

2564:

Thanks for engaging with my question. While I may still disagree with the answer, I respect the effort that you made to address my concerns and will reflect that fact when voting. I do not intend to press the issue further. Just to follow up, though, with an initial apology if I came off as hostile -

2172:

Basically a boomerang is exactly that. They claim you edit X, the charge is now that they do so. I don't always agree with boomerangs because there are real cases where people bring stuff to ANI and then right away it's boomerang. But in general, if you bring a case to ANI, your posts and behavior is

2151:

Hello, and thank you. I do hope that I am not violating some arcane rule just by writing to you. But the truth is that although I have learned my way around AfD, and am comfortable enough with sources to occasionally venture an opinion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, I find ANI aversive that I

1063:

in 2018. Along the way, I had to discard a mention of a Hebrew Song Contest, as I couldn't find it mentioned in reliable sources, especially when ones that were based on our article were discounted! I notice you've done work on the article in the past- if you can find a reference, please let me know

179:

The reason why I changed "Palestinian territories to" "State of Palestine" is because the locations are referring to the actual country itself (reminder that majority of nations in the UN do recognize Palestine as sovereign). I dont seem to see the problem with this very small edit. It is a lot more

4133:

It's not my intent to "threaten" you; I was going for an appeal to your basic human decency, mixed with a clear indication of appropriate boundaries. But since that didn't seem to take—and for the avoidance of ambiguity—I will block you or take other action if you continue with this sort of ignorant

4092:

has any meaning, it exists to proscribe this kind of editorial rhetoric. Moreover, this project is international in scope and we no doubt have contributors from many of the countries which you've blithely disparaged; again, it is not acceptable to use this kind of language to denigrate those editors

3102:

Don't threaten me. It's clear in policy that not everything needs a ref next to it. For example, in the section you think needs a ref, there is a hyperlinked three words, Battle of XXX. That is all. There is nothing to reference. The entire section is just a list coming from a secondary article. And

2156:

is no help at all. Am I, for example, expected to bring diffs on the several editors accusing me of bad editing? I learned the ropes at AfD by blundering into one rule after another until more or less I figured it out. Somehow, it doesn't seem like a god way to handle ANI, although that is more or

226:

I can kind of seem why but the wording "territories" feels more like a geographical sense. I was changing it into the actual country it actually resides in. For example, the Indian territories in the United States. They count as basically seperate countries with their own governments & law (even

4518:

About the Off the Derech page: I'm willing to accept criticism on the npov of *some* of the edits, but much of what is currently on the page, in your version pre-the vast amount of work and citation I added, is not npov itself. I do not agree that my edits were npov, and your reversion does more to

2803:

I have read it, and guess that we will have to agree to disagree. I still see your branding of me as an antisemite to be opportunistic and founded in fact. I am not opposing you because of your faith, but because of yoir policy. My problem is not with the fact that you are Jewish, but the fact that

2767:

I have come here with an epiphany. I am very sorry if my comment was construed as anti-Semitic. I assure you that it was not intended to be so. In most of my edits in wiki space, I attempt to maintain humour and a light tone. It appears that this ambition has led me astray. The initial comment with

2710:

little gem which I noted on the admin boards at the time. A Jewish wikipedia editor is apparently responsible for "the rise of antisemitism" (and notice how he includes himself in those feeling more antisemitic). Not a peep from the admins, of course. Imagine telling a woman she was responsible for

2678:

It's called goysplaning. The idea that any complaint about antisemitism is in itself an indication of bad faith is not unique to Knowledge (XXG) but is taken here to the extreme, just like everything else. (you may recall I was once barred from making AE reports because I reported someone who said,

2351:

I find it funny in a way in how people are "non-Jew"-splaining on what is or not perceived as anti-semitism. As I have said many times before, on Knowledge (XXG), the only minority group you are allowed to "persecute" are Jews. Can you imagine a different minority telling someone that their comment

2302:

Yes, I think when you start the case they ask if you want p'shara or din, but they push for p'shara, I don't know if that is also to accommodate issues with being legally recognized arbitration. I just think there are times when you know you're right and want your day in court, but we're all taught

2211:

I went to the ANI independently because I'm sick to the back teeth of E.M.Gregory's behaviour. The boomerang proposal was embarrassingly naïve and makes your judgement appear very poor. Unlike you I'm not obsessed with one or two topics and I edit widely (and rarely in the Israel/Palestine area) so

2184:

Nice to see you guys getting on like a house on fire as usual. Sir Joseph - I hope you noted that the closing admin at the ANI said "I do have to say that some of the boomerang proposals are particularly ridiculous and do not reflect well on some of those who proposed them." Your conduct at the ANI

1903:

I have an anxiety problem I am taking medication for and I can't face the blunt, quick, two worded, fast paced, complete rejection that occurs when a Sir Joseph doesn't work with a statement and instead just removes it. Hopefully you guys can make things work better. If not, I guess what I had to

154:

if you had changed their location from "6th Street" to "7th Street" within the same town, without changing "Palestinian territories" to "State of Palestine", nobody would have taken that to be an edit falling under the Arab-Israeli conflict. (Or, if Sir Joseph had, I would have told him to zip it.)

4429:

I moved your comment from the closed thread to my talk page, as you seem to be replying to me. I hope you don't mind. It's a perfectly reasonable clarification that completely justifies the original statement IMHO, and if anyone gives you grief over it in the future, you can direct them to my talk

2651:

So, I'm sitting there waiting for a dentist appointment and I get an email notifying me about the Arbcom elections. As I had a few minutes to kill and was already prepared for some pain, I decided to stop by and see how this amateur production of Lord of the Flies was going. Imagine my surprise to

2117:

It's a little of both. Gun ownership does rely on "gun rights" but it is a civil liberty, at least in the US, to own guns and it's this civil liberty that the NRA advocates for. I am not sure of the timeline, and I do recall months ago a statement in the lead about how the NRA is a civil liberties

4294:

Agreed. All he had to do was ask, as MrX did and I provided a source. VM should really stay away from AE, I imagine he is in the top 5 AE action starters. I know I keep talking about the toxicity of Wiki, but this really is. You might notice that in the Israel-Palestinian area, most people before

4279:

Yep. Joseph and I aren't exactly best buddies, but this is a horseshit complaint, lodged by someone I suspect it would be best to seek an IBAN with (although, of course, that won't stop frivilous drama board reports as lodging them is currently exempt from IBANs; until such a time, however, that

4087:

Leaving aside the question of whether these comments are substantively ignorant, they are completely inappropriate for an article talkpage or, really, for any space on Knowledge (XXG). Denigrating entire countries (and, by extension, the citizens of those countries, on the basis of their national

2696:

Yes, I remember the AE and the article. I also had an issue here while editing Bernie Sanders and Milgram. I do think though that people being told they are playing a card is not that often with most minorities. Regardless, I was always told that if someone told me my comment was offensive was to

4096:

If possible, please exercise some introspection and self-restraint and keep these kinds of opinions, should you hold them, off the pages of Knowledge (XXG). If you're not capable of that sort of restraint, then please refrain from editing articles and pages that trigger the temptation for you to

2199:

How funny. Huldra posts an ANI and you come running. Stay off my talk page, I have no interest in speaking with you. And I am going to presume those comments are not for me. I posted a boomerang request after two others requested it. And my request was simple, a boomerang. You should look in the

148:

On the one hand, you passed the threshold of extended confirmed earlier today, so in that respect you are certainly now eligible to edit in the ARBPIA area. That said, the edits you made on the article, in replacing "Palestinian territories" with "State of Palestine", placed those edits squarely

4234:

It's terrible and what is ironic is that I'm not a Trump supporter in any way, and I urge all those on the witchhunt to realize that your actions and comments are feeding the alt-right, (see the recent NY Times article on this, how you shut down discussion, you end up diverting people to fringe

4166:

Correct, saying Canada is a shithole country is not a violation of any Wikpedia rules. I find it very wrong that an admin believes that saying that is far worse than telling a user to fuck off. Furthermore, his threats are more along the lines of why editing in Knowledge (XXG) is such a toxic

4295:

they bring an AE (even if it's 100% warranted) will post on the talk page first and give time to rectify the error. Had VM done that, this could have been cleared up real quickly. And his bringing in the Bernie Sanders blocks (which were not BLP blocks) just shows the bad faith in my opinion.

366:

Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be

2099:

here: All of the sources cited describe the NRA as a gun rights group, not a "gun rights and civil liberties group" (which wrongly implies that the NRA is involved in some broader civil liberties debate, which is not the case). Can you undo your edit? I view this as a very straightforward

4129:

Likewise, I think you've missed my point about civility. There is a difference between telling someone to fuck off, and denigrating entire groups of people on the basis of their national origin. While both are uncivil, I take the latter more seriously than the former, as do most thinking

2487:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4167:

environment. Calling any country a shithole country is no violation because there is no aggrieved person. I am not saying Canadians are shitholes, or a specific Canadian is a shithole, if I say Canada is a shithole country, I am saying the country as a whole, not as an individual.

2331:

Here's the comment as it is, and I note that I am the only one who got descriptors, I do think it's fairly common for some segment of the people to point out the religion of someone, but I make no claim about any editor, just pointing out it shares resemblance with those types of

4042:

I'd like to apologise for my comment at AN/I; I was under the impression that anything that modifies the 'skin' and which the reader has not opted into was not ok, but obviously I was wrong and I apologise unreservedly for any insinuation that you had done anything wrong.

3578:. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. 3086:

is patently untrue, but I'm not going to continue this, because I don't want this to become skewed into something it isn't. The article wasn't in suitable condition for the main page, it still isn't, and if it's not improved, it won't be featured next year. Bye for now.

2226:

Firstly, I told you to stay off my page. Secondly, guess what? I also came to ANI independently. And you are biased. When you edit Israel or terror related articles, you edit with your bias showing. And I also edit in a variety of topics. And again, stay off my page.

4458:

Nevermind, I see that NeilN reverted my removal. If it's okay with them, it's fine by me. I've left the copy up at my page in case you want to add to it anytime in the near future. I think I forgot to thank you for that edit, but I do appreciate the clarification.

421:

has been marked as historical. Knowledge (XXG) talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it

4083:"Most of those countries that was mentioned (sic) are run by dictators, corrupt and all around shitty countries. It doesn't make one racist for stating the obvious. Look at Haiti... Sometimes countries are shitholes and it's not necessarily racist to say so." 4204:"you've repeatedly denigrated entire countries—or, more accurately, an entire continent—using abusive language devoid of any redeeming value. Specifically, in a discussion of African nations, you opined that "many of those countries are shithole countries" 3240: 3254:

Despite our differences, it takes courage to run for the office of an Arbitration Committee officer, bravery to encounter criticism and respond with civility, and grace to accept defeat with humility. Therefore, this barnstar is well deserved.

4093:

on the basis of their national origin. (To be clear, national governments are fair targets of criticism, but to dismiss an entire continent as a "shithole" is outside the realm of reasonable critical dialog; it's simply a term of abuse).

3545: 5444:

is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Knowledge (XXG) and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the

107:

You said I recently edited an Arab-Israeli conflict page which is untrue, please show me which article it was. I only edited the Palestinian universities to improve their location. This does not fall under the Arab-Israeli conflict

2997:

A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak'

4633:

will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a

151:

There was not really any ambiguity in the locations within those articles, so it's not as if they exactly corrected a problem. (For example, it's not as if the articles said "Syria", and you then changed them to "Palestine".)

3543:

to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is

2908:

was not constructive at all. The clean ups are done in order to avoid the appearance of low quality articles on the main page. You can still resolve the issues of any articles you'd like to see on the main page. Regards.

252:

I struck part of my first comment, as you clearly see yourself as having corrected a big problem. I don't agree. But my point in any event was really not that so much as the fact that such an edit does fall under ARBPIA.

2287:

Concerning BD (not here), there is a strong historical preference to encourage p'shara, of course. But don't most Batei Din give the parties some latitude as to their preference for p'shara, p'shara k'rova ladin or din?

2275:

Thanks. It should be an interesting few weeks. (BTW, that is one thing about BD I don't like. My family is/was involved in a dispute and the BD automatically tries pushing p'shara when with din, we'd be victorious.)

5407:

While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the

2152:

rarely dip a toe in unless dragged there. I am, therefore, puzzled to know whether I am required to do anything further at this point, or indeed, permitted to do so. Can you point me to an explanation of BOOMERANG?

2515: 1352:

Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on

3644:

I'm not trolling. I gave my opinion and I stand by it. She deserves all the criticism that RS has on her and the only reason it's not on the page is right now she's still well liked by a good chunk of the left.

4077:, you've repeatedly denigrated entire countries—or, more accurately, an entire continent—using abusive language devoid of any redeeming value. Specifically, in a discussion of African nations, you opined that 202:

Whether or not I agree with your assessment, I do understand your reasoning. My point, however, was that the characterization of Palestine as "state" or "territories" is a question that falls under ARBPIA.

4152:

deals with editor to editor conduct, not editors making disparaging comments about countries. If that were the case, every anti-Israel editor in the Arab-Israeli topic area would be banned for life.

2499:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 5002: 4997: 4584:

The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

4304:

Yeah, hence why I'm thinking some kind of IBAN which extends to AE etc should be sought. If any infringement you make is "so bad", he could request another editor to assess it, or email Arbcom.

2107:

I also note that this verbiage was recently added, and then challenged (by me). This can of course be discussed on the talk page (as it currently is now), but it should not be unilaterally added.

5433: 3540: 2173:

fair game. So basically, I think at this point, a boomerang means that you and others can provide diffs to show that the cause of action that was brought upon you was not in good faith.

3031:

candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.

5455: 4652: 3829: 3055: 1803: 1565: 1554: 1369: 964: 429: 3124: 4619:

progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

2596:. Rather, I am trying to cast an informed ballot for ARBCOM in an effort to become more involved in the project. Once this is satisfactorily resolved, I shan't bother you again. 5243: 1822: 155:

But the edit you made was exactly the kind of edit that places an otherwise potentially benign article directly in the conflict zone. Please don't try to play naive on this.

5413: 4025: 378:

Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to

5289: 4338: 4327: 4208:

OMG... where is my tiny violin, laugh-track, and ROFL emojis when I need them? Or my mountain-out-of-a-molehill meme? The manufactured outrage is strong with this one,

5294: 3016: 1748: 1335: 927: 379: 1762:

Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see

1302:. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today! 2905: 1598: 1587: 5200: 2575:

Nonetheless, that said, I will now drop the matter as you have done your utmost to address my concerns vis-á-vis ARBCOM. Sincerest best of luck in the election.

388:

has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

5224: 618: 5320: 5106: 5095: 3044: 1792: 1358: 1075: 953: 414: 5518: 5507: 5139: 5128: 2337:

Sir Joseph (T-C-L) is a Jewish Republican from New York City, living on the Jersey side of the river. Kudos for trying to learn a little Yiddish......

4430:

page, or just to me, and I'll explain why I think it was just a misunderstanding on my part. Here are the diffs of the move, for your convenience: I

418: 227:

US police cannot enter these territories without permission) but they are on "American" territories yet they are basically considered a new country.

1176: 1165: 5073: 5062: 1466: 1455: 995: 984: 493: 482: 5365:

Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator

1532: 1521: 892:

pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

363:

pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

3559: 747: 736: 5815: 5804: 1744:

pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.

1289:

pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.

5910: 5877: 5844: 5811: 5778: 5745: 5712: 5679: 5646: 5613: 5580: 5547: 5514: 5481: 5135: 5102: 5069: 5036: 4944: 4911: 4834: 4801: 4768: 4735: 4702: 4669: 4542: 4489: 4400: 4367: 4334: 3990: 3957: 3890: 3857: 3462: 3406: 3281: 3206: 2875: 2622: 2443: 2371: 2066: 2033: 1693: 1660: 1627: 1594: 1561: 1528: 1495: 1462: 1429: 1396: 1238: 1205: 1172: 1139: 1106: 1024: 991: 841: 808: 743: 710: 677: 644: 588: 555: 522: 489: 456: 314: 5463: 2529: 5749: 5738: 5347:

users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the

2792: 2680: 1919: 5193: 4673: 4662: 3536: 1784: 1345: 4772: 4761: 3763: 845: 834: 5236: 4493: 4482: 3567: 1865:

The close was indeed close. We probably responded to the same delsort listing. I edit conflicted with the !vote above me by Galatz.

2570:

P.S. If we are worried about perceptions on Knowledge (XXG), purging a valid question doesn't come off as particularly diplomatic.

5313: 2955:

pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.

1943: 592: 581: 5255: 5250: 5212: 4875:

See my next null edit. I am not edit warring, I am restoring to what the consensus has and what the lead should be summarizing.

3374: 1828:

Your speedy close there with 1 D and 1 K !vote is not proper. I did advance a policy arguement despite nom's failure. Note that

1339:. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Knowledge (XXG) will be restricted to users with 5459: 3550:

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means

2879: 2868: 2525: 1939: 1110: 1099: 94: 86: 5231: 5217: 5207: 3325: 2508: 4225: 3748: 3365: 81: 69: 64: 59: 5284: 4198: 136: 5716: 5705: 3439: 2850: 2742: 2716: 2687: 2657: 777: 5262: 3563: 282:

I don't seem to see the problem with this very small edit. It is a lot more accurately correct to use "State of Palestine

5617: 5606: 3994: 3983: 3344: 460: 449: 391: 5914: 5903: 5395: 5279: 3575: 5383:

The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant

5306: 4127:

view that most African countries are "shitholes". That's a key distinction. Can you clarify whether you understand it?

3410: 3399: 2737:

1. Obvious sock. 2. Obvious DICK. Again, if this place had any integrity someone would ban him for that kind of shit.

2520: 944: 397: 3571: 3551: 1780: 4309: 4285: 3894: 3883: 3092: 2794:

I have no problem with accepting an olive branch, if you remove you're comment about antisemitism from your guide.

38: 5409: 3442: 3387: 1340: 1314: 4948: 4937: 4258: 2185:

reflected very poorly on you. But at least your loyalty and disruptive behaviour has impressed your Dear Leader.

1010: 5427: 4604:

We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

3555: 3128: 2964:

and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

5440:

that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections.

4446: 4181: 4157: 4033: 1499: 1488: 5344: 3936:

I appreciate your contributions regarding my topic ban as well as your thoughts on Arbitration Enforcement. --

2846: 2819:

said anything about you. The only bad faith here is from editors telling me I throw out the antisemitism card.

2738: 2712: 2683: 2653: 2496: 2134:

I changed the wording a bit, that it advocates for gun rights as a civil liberty, which should be acceptable.

773: 4889: 4864: 4404: 4393: 4212:. Watch out, you might end up the subject of a NYT op-ed or endless discussion topic on CNN for a day. ;-) 3801:

The backlog drive will begin on January 1 and run until January 29. Prize tiers and other info can be found

3260: 2836: 2809: 2781: 2601: 2580: 1915: 931:. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features. 5183: 5176: 5169: 4641:

for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at

3523:

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Knowledge (XXG). It does

3436: 1907: 5018: 4468: 3837: 3500: 3103:

we don't need to be overly aggressive with things that are in linked articles. Now go away from my page.

3065: 2424:

Hi, no, I don't have an account on IRC, but you can email me if you don't want to discuss things on wiki.

2217: 2190: 2012: 1988: 1810: 1631: 1620: 1376: 971: 437: 3655: 2153: 5782: 5771: 5390:

Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for

4305: 4281: 3861: 3850: 3670: 3634: 3609:

for the purpose of promoting an opinion about the article or its subject. I would urge you to undo this

3587: 3088: 2375: 2364: 2320: 2162: 1911: 4638: 3802: 2593: 4252: 4176:

I wonder if MastCell would be so proactively irate if you referred to the US as a "shithole" country?

3798:

by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

3123:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at

1317:

that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see:

938:

are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by

5348: 4597: 4546: 4535: 4254: 4048: 3823:. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing. 3794: 3285: 3274: 2960: 2951: 2307: 2280: 2231: 2204: 2177: 1963: 1858: 1764: 1740: 1294: 1285: 1089: 888: 791: 626: 318: 307: 127: 47: 17: 5340: 4630: 3618: 3602: 3028: 2483: 1299: 935: 4915: 4904: 4838: 4827: 4739: 4728: 4706: 4695: 4439: 4177: 4153: 4029: 2980: 2293: 2265: 621:? You helped guide me on the right way to request a COI edit, and the topic is under debate now. 293: 258: 232: 208: 185: 160: 113: 5384: 4520: 3606: 3369: 2492: 2404:

channel? Just wondering, as I was wanting to contact you in a quicker form than user-talk pages.

394:

adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Knowledge (XXG)

5683: 5672: 5485: 5474: 5040: 5029: 4273: 4222: 3745: 3362: 3256: 3210: 3199: 3039:

can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.

2832: 2805: 2777: 2597: 2576: 2412: 1433: 1422: 1143: 1132: 1028: 1017: 4980: 4149: 4089: 3019:

has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer

3042:

To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to

1790:

To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to

1356:

To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to

951:

To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to

5925: 5892: 5881: 5870: 5859: 5826: 5793: 5760: 5727: 5694: 5661: 5628: 5595: 5562: 5529: 5496: 5150: 5117: 5084: 5051: 5014: 4959: 4926: 4849: 4816: 4783: 4750: 4717: 4684: 4573: 4557: 4524: 4504: 4461: 4415: 4382: 4349: 4074: 4005: 3972: 3905: 3872: 3833: 3778: 3554:

administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the

3496: 3477: 3421: 3318: 3311: 3296: 3221: 3185: 3159: 3061: 2935: 2890: 2637: 2626: 2615: 2550: 2458: 2386: 2213: 2186: 2081: 2048: 2008: 1984: 1870: 1844: 1806: 1724: 1708: 1675: 1642: 1609: 1576: 1543: 1510: 1477: 1444: 1411: 1372: 1269: 1253: 1220: 1209: 1198: 1187: 1154: 1121: 1069: 1039: 1006: 967: 872: 856: 823: 812: 801: 758: 725: 692: 659: 603: 570: 537: 526: 515: 504: 471: 433: 345: 329: 5370: 3024: 2504: 5551: 5540: 4805: 4794: 4371: 4360: 4235:

sites.) and it's just amazing how suddenly personal attacks are allowed on Knowledge (XXG).

3679:

Don't do that. I would hate to report you for an ARBPIA infraction for such a little thing.

3666: 3630: 3583: 3466: 3455: 2158: 2037: 2026: 1888: 1697: 1686: 1242: 1231: 925:

The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the

681: 670: 648: 637: 5391: 4642: 4637:

Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the

3444:

I give it another year or so and maybe the leftist PC crowd will even acknowledge it here.

3020: 2507:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2500: 2401: 1747:

We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before

1060: 385: 5848: 5837: 4876: 4296: 4236: 4209: 4168: 4111: 4059: 4044: 3680: 3646: 3445: 3177: 3104: 2820: 2795: 2771: 2729: 2698: 2670: 2425: 2353: 2342: 2323: 2304: 2277: 2228: 2201: 2174: 2135: 2129: 2119: 2108: 2070: 2059: 1999: 1977: 1960: 1855: 1086: 788: 622: 559: 548: 124: 3654:

That may be your view, but it's inappropriate for a talk page. I've removed the comments

1854:

Hi, you must have put that delete in while I was doing the close. I will undo the close.

1319: 914:

in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

5584: 5573: 4148:

There is little that I could add to what Sir Joseph accurately articulated, other than

3961: 3950: 3132: 2910: 2447: 2436: 2289: 2261: 1664: 1653: 934:

Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not

714: 703: 289: 275: 254: 247: 228: 221: 204: 197: 181: 174: 156: 143: 109: 5929: 5896: 5863: 5830: 5797: 5764: 5731: 5698: 5665: 5632: 5599: 5566: 5533: 5500: 5467: 5154: 5121: 5088: 5055: 5022: 4963: 4930: 4894: 4879: 4869: 4853: 4820: 4787: 4754: 4721: 4688: 4561: 4528: 4508: 4474: 4452: 4419: 4386: 4353: 4313: 4299: 4289: 4262: 4239: 4229: 4185: 4171: 4161: 4140: 4114: 4103: 4062: 4052: 4037: 4009: 3976: 3940: 3909: 3876: 3841: 3752: 3683: 3674: 3649: 3638: 3591: 3516: 3504: 3481: 3448: 3425: 3300: 3264: 3225: 3189: 3145: 3107: 3096: 3069: 2923: 2894: 2854: 2840: 2823: 2813: 2798: 2785: 2746: 2732: 2720: 2701: 2691: 2673: 2661: 2641: 2605: 2584: 2554: 2533: 2462: 2428: 2418: 2390: 2356: 2345: 2326: 2309: 2297: 2282: 2269: 2233: 2221: 2206: 2194: 2179: 2166: 2138: 2122: 2111: 2101: 2085: 2052: 2016: 2002: 1992: 1923: 1892: 1874: 1860: 1848: 1814: 1712: 1679: 1646: 1613: 1580: 1547: 1514: 1481: 1448: 1415: 1380: 1257: 1224: 1191: 1158: 1125: 1091: 1079: 1043: 975: 860: 827: 793: 781: 762: 729: 696: 663: 630: 607: 574: 541: 508: 475: 441: 333: 297: 262: 236: 212: 189: 164: 129: 117: 4269: 4215: 4136: 4099: 3738: 3355: 2406: 1049: 5432:

has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including

4580: 3923: 3699: 5921: 5888: 5855: 5822: 5789: 5756: 5723: 5690: 5657: 5624: 5591: 5558: 5525: 5492: 5146: 5113: 5080: 5047: 4955: 4922: 4888:

to include it. Since then, there hasn't been any talkpage discussion either way. --

4845: 4812: 4779: 4746: 4713: 4680: 4553: 4500: 4411: 4378: 4345: 4001: 3968: 3901: 3868: 3473: 3417: 3333: 3292: 3217: 3181: 2886: 2633: 2546: 2454: 2382: 2077: 2044: 1866: 1840: 1704: 1671: 1638: 1605: 1572: 1539: 1506: 1473: 1440: 1407: 1249: 1216: 1183: 1150: 1117: 1065: 1035: 1002: 852: 819: 754: 721: 688: 655: 599: 566: 533: 500: 467: 325: 3349: 2474: 3706: 3435:

It looks like even the left leaning NYTimes is finally coming to see the truth.

2987:. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable. 1884: 1831: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2975:

If you know other editors with a good understanding of Knowledge (XXG) policy,

5650: 5639: 3937: 3239: 1400: 1389: 5396:

Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

3815:

The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

2118:

advocate organization. This was discussed at length on the talk page there.

2679:

inter alia, that Purim is a celebration of genocide). Have you read this -

1313:

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for

284:". The whole point of going on Knowledge (XXG) is to read & add things 367:

followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

3731: 3716: 3173: 1343:

status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to

1298:

pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before

2697:

explain myself, or apologize and mention that it was not meant as that.

2511:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

619:

Knowledge (XXG):Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Sefaria_requested_edits

400:

adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

4571:

Hello Sir Joseph, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

4123:

simply "discussing Trump's comments". You were expressing your own

2545:

Dear sir joseph, My vote for you for new development of wikipedia.

4579: 3776: