This is an archive of past discussions about User:Asenine. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Page was deleted before references could be added. Not advertising. Berlin School is a MBA program from Steinbeis University, Berlin. Would you please unblock to allow revision. Thank you very much.Downtown000 (talk) 02:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)downtown000
My stance on adminship
Since I have worked quite a bit with this user and know his contributions well, what I meant by my statement is that I felt that he meets all the requirements already, and that he shouldn't have to change much since I am convinced he already ticks all the boxes mentioned on Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. Clearly I don't think that people don't need any requirements in general. Hope that clarifies it for you. JACOPLANE • 2008-08-1 13:54
...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, Gazimoff22:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Freedom of Panorama
Basically, there are exemptions to copyright law in some countries that to some degree, allow photography of artwork and buildings in a public place without infringement of the original copyright on the subject, allowing us to license them under free licenses as required by our policies. But, in some countries, the laws allow this, but for non-commercial or educational use only, and some countries don't have it at all, only allowing incidental and/or noncommercial use. ViperSnake15120:07, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up, I have contributed to some of the discussions. Are you happy now with all of 20K's images? J Milburn (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I have just explained replaceable fair use (along with a few links) in response to him claiming that the three images of comedians uploaded earlier today are not replaceable. I think a lot of this is just not understanding our copyright policies, and I would have been happy just to assume good faith, but the outright lying when uploading and even when confronted has irritated me somewhat. J Milburn (talk) 20:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll put it on my mantlepiece. Good work on dealing with those images- I was wondering what to do about the uploads when I had to make a phonecall- it was great to see someone had dealt with it when I got back. If you ever need some admin assistance, you know where I am. J Milburn (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I had to use 20K as my full name would not have fitted in my signature. Anyway, 20K is a registered account, but it hasn't done any contributions due to it being a "shortcut" account. -- 20000Talk/Contributions20:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Right, are you familiar with the checkuser system? I've never used it. This user seems to have come out of nowhere to suddenly support 20K in everything, and there are a number of similarities between the two of them. I'm going to look into requesting a checkuser as soon as I have looked over these PUI discussions. J Milburn (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Right, I'll create the checkuser now. Enjoy your holiday/business trip- I'll drop you a message with a link to it, and hopefully you'll be able to see the results tomorrow. J Milburn (talk) 20:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Looking at the instructions, I don't think a checkuser is appropriate, but I am going to look into the contributions of both accounts and see if there is any cause for concern. I may submit it to ANI and see what others think. J Milburn (talk) 20:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, it's on ANI. Hopefully someone can tell us what to do from here. The image you linked me to was just a duplicate of the BBC 2 logo (the one linked from 20K's template). J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
No, I refuse to stop because a minority of editors are concerned about what they in some cases
(wrongly) percive as 'inappropriate' In reviewing I did note quite few
images which probably should not have been, when there were concerns
were noted to me, I did take steps to de-tag.
Perhaps rather than moaning about the level of tagging, you could help by adding the requested
sources, rationales or clarification?
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Every time this gets taken to AN/I or any other page for discussion, the result always seems to be the same. They're annoying, but not against any policy. WP:USER says that they're generally frowned upon, not that they are forbidden. In fact, you can see on the first history page of User:Certified.Gangsta where this last came up and was edit warred over, but remained after discussion on AN/I. --Onorem♠Dil13:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for undoing your edit. It's definitely not something I care enough about that I would've reverted you myself. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea one of these days to recheck consensus on these things and clear up the policy wording. --Onorem♠Dil13:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:ANI
I thought the block was a little lenient. I had requested Thatcher take a look at the IP that posted on my talk page. I suspect we will see more socks coming up yet... J Milburn (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification on OTRS. As far as Mrs. Kiester's image is concerned, I am working to find a better image anyhow (that one is close to 15 years old). Still, I will be in contact with her in order to accertain whether she intended it to be free-use or use-specific. In the event that she clarifies that it is free-use, what is the licensing tag that I am supposed to use? JAGUITAR (Rawr)03:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou
Just a little note to say thankyou for participating in my successful RFA candidacy, which passed with 96 supports, 0 opposes, and 1 neutral. I am pleasantly taken aback by the amount of support for me to contribute in an administrative role and look forward to demonstrating that such faith is well placed. Regards, WilliamH (talk)09:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and/or the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for your participating in the account creation process. ——RyanLupin • (talk)16:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Being granted access to the ACC tool doesn't automatically assign you with the account creator right. You are only flagged if you keep hitting the maximum 6 accounts a day quota. Once you've shown evidence of a desire to help with the account creation process, you can apply for the flag at WP:PERM ——RyanLupin • (talk)16:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
When a user is deferred to admins, it means regular users cannot create the account because it is too similar to an existing username. Wikipedia admins can override the anti-spoof and create 'similar' accounts. If you see a username that's been deferred to admins, the chances are, you won't be able to create the account so you should probably just leave it there until an admin comes along. If you have IRC, pop along to #wikipedia-en-accounts where there are many account creators discussing the tool, regards —— RyanLupin • (talk)08:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Admins would still be able to create the account. If the similar account hasn't been used for a while, the admin will override their username and give it to the user making the request. —— RyanLupin • (talk)09:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
"In his daily editing, a newbie user edits a prominent page, and his edit is reasonably trivial. It does not violate any policies, and it contains reliable sources. Unbeknownst to them, the edit they just made was against an overwhelming consensus on the talk page. Disgruntled editors then take action and replace the edited text with their own version which was decided with consensus. Their version, however, does not include any sources at all, and is unverifiable. What should be done to resolve the issue effectively, and which editor is doing the right thing according to policy? In a nutshell: Which is more important, verifiability or consensus? "
How would this ever happen in the first place. When would editors making an edit with overwhelming consensus ever use a non-sourced comment? 19:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
Asenine, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. Very kind words indeed! I liked your question, too. If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)20:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Procter and Gamble Logo.svg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Procter and Gamble Logo.svg. 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) 05:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
RfA thank you
Asenine/Archive 24, I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me. — JGHowestalk - 19 August 2008
I do not care, but lmfao, wow...
You tagged a speedy deletion on my page, eh? How else could I word that list? Move the text around? Suuure. That would make a lot of difference. Y5nthon5a (talk) 08:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I still would like to know why you deleted my page, regaurdless of if you think I attacked you or not. It took me a while to get that page together. Y5nthon5a (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for that. I was unaware that it was a copyvio (how do you guys find copyvio images like that so easily?) LeiaY22:48, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Vacation Disclaimer Outdated
Chris, I've got something to tell you...
The vacation disclaimer on your userpage is outdated.* Could you remove it please so people don't get confused whether they've gone back in time or not. Thanks. -- 92.21.163.135 (talk) 19:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
* You're back from a holiday and the end date says August 17, 2008.
I would like to request an adoption
Hello, I was just looking at the list of adopters and I would be interesting in being adopted. I am new to Wikipedia so it would be great to have someone who could help me with any problems, thanks. Cowburn88 (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Help with references
Hi Asenine, I need some help with editing an article. The article in question is Cock Sparrer. In the career section, I want to add references for the Rebellion Vienna and Blackpool festivals. I have the correct website links to show they headlined, but I am not sure on how to actually add the reference. Thanks for your time. Cowburn88 (talk) 20:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Admin Coaching
Hi there! After a review of your edits, I have just one bit of advice for you, and that is just a little more anti-vandalism work. I see that you want to do anti-vandal work, but I would like to see a little more anti-vandal work before we continue. I see you installed Huggle, which is good. Xclamation point20:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Asenine. I think your oppose about a sock puppet needs a diff, at the least. If the sockpuppet is confirmed, please provide a link to an SSP/RFCU report. I think an accusation that leads to a strong oppose needs back-up, especially since Eco is claiming, and I believe him, that he knows nothing of this sock. Thanks! TravellingCari14:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 47 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thanks again and cheers! TN‑X-Man19:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Xfire logo.png. 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) 05:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about the late response, I was on vacation for the past few weeks. To answer your question, I am still kinda out of the loop since vacation over at ACC (ACC is the correct abbreviation for whatever reason) and you might want to try our bug tracker to request the new feature. Cheers, FastLizard4 (Talk•Index•Sign) 22:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Powerpuff Girls logo.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:The Powerpuff Girls logo.png. 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) 06:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
RfA questions
Just a minor point about a question you asked Bettia in his RfA, although I seem to remember seeing the same question on others. I though I'd bring it up here arther than in RFA because otherwise it would only distract from matters of substance there.
Will your current activities continue if you are appointed with the mop and bucket? If so, which will you drop/be less active in/be more active in/take up?
The question seems to invert its sense midway through. If you answer "yes" to the first part, then the second part applies according to the grammar, but the semantics need the second part to apply if you answer "no". It should probably be "If not..."
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Labour.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Labour.svg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Asenine, Just a note that I have posted a question for your attention at Cbl62's RfA (in the "oppose" section). Your response to that question would be one I'd be very interested in.
Follow-up. I have replied again, in turn. I point out that Cbl62's answer to Q8 is actually in line with precisely what WP:BLOCK states; what Kurt is expecting as an answer is not what our policies document. I respectfully request that you re-consider your opposition here, at least on the grounds presented. Anthøny✉12:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
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. –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone19:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
As you know, you currently oppose Tadakuni's willingness to take on additional administrative responsibilities. In this context, I wonder if there might be corollary questions which deserve to be evaluated and answered? Is it possible to convince you to change your mind?
Although your reasoning might have been entirely justified in any number of other cases, is it possible that Tadakuni's expressed intentions and prospective contributions deserve your support rather than your opposition? I would have thought that Wikipedia's progress towards enhanced quality would be unduly retarded if Tadakuni's interest in taking on additional responsibility were too casually disparaged, discouraged, denied?
Like Harvard professor Harold Bolitho, Tadakuni's editing interests have focused on Tokugawa institutions, the Bakumatsu and the pre- and early-Meiji Restoration period. In Bolitho's 1969 doctoral dissertation at Yale, The Fudai Daimyo and the Tokogawa Settlement, a very specific point-of-view about the fudaidaimyo in the bakufu was developed. Tadakuni has taken Bolitho's work as a starting point for expanding the number and quality of articles about the Tokugawa bureaucratic positions -- from the Kyoto Shoshidai to the Nagasaki bugyō, etc. He has been even more persistent in expanding the number and quality of articles about the individuals and clans who filled these shogunate offices -- from Tanuma Okitsugu to the Sakai clan, etc. Bolitho argued that historians who believed too readily that the fudai were mere bureaucrats missed the point in a number of important ways. Fortuitously, what Tadakuni has been doing is precisely the sort of preparation for administrative service which I would want to succeed -- not only because of the consistency of his contributions thus far, but because he seems never to have missed the point. Your opposition seems to be based on the perception that Tadakuni has missed something crucial, but maybe your first-blush assessment deserves to be re-visited?
I suspect that whatever Tadakuni does as an administrator will help make the Wikipedia experience better for me and others in ways I'm not able to predict. I believe that whatever Tadakuni does will turn out to be indirectly complementary to the work on articles I'm personally interested in developing, e.g., Nihon Ōdai Ichiran, Japanese era names, List of Emperors of Japan, etc.
I'm writing now because I wonder what good it might achieve? Although it was a little outside Tadakuni's area of interest, Tadakuni's contribution to my efforts to develop Daijō-kan proved invaluable -- especially at a time when I was a little bit discouraged by the difficulties of the tasks at hand. I valued that help, and this seems a good way to respond constructively.
For these reasons, I've taken the novel step of attempting to convince you to change your position from opposition to support. --Tenmei (talk) 02:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm at a loss to understand your choice of the verb "badger" in this context. My guess is that your perception might have been skewed by the proximity to comments posted by editors who failed to appreciate the utility of questions you posted. There was no intended irony in characterizing your questions as thought-provoking; and I have now underscored that fact by posting the following at Tadakuni, at Buckshot06, and at IMatthew:
I've add a follow-up to a question you've already answered:
Now that some time has passed since you answered this question, perhaps you might want to try again to express yourself in different words? Your rhetorical tactic is evasive in this context. As I see it, Asenine crisply summarized the focus: "Which is more important, verifiability or consensus?" If you don't construe this question as deserving a more thoughtful and revealing response, my question becomes "Why not?"
It seems reasonable to press for a more fully-developed comment and analysis. In my view, this is a hard, fast pitch, but it is not at all inappropriate in this context. Your answer will be read by a number of editors who would not necessarily pay much attention to what you do or say in other venues. This becomes a unique opportunity to affect the evolving consensus on a key point which comes up again and again in all sorts of circumstances. I would argue that the only wrong answer is an evasive one.
Now that your elevation to the ranks of administrators is virtually assured, you have an opportunity to introduce a salutatory comment. In effect, my question becomes an invitation to convert this confirmation exercise into something constructive.
I urge you to continue to post RfA questions in the hope that repetition will prove constructive in the long run. --Tenmei (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
You've presented a lady or the tiger conundrum -- excellent, unavoidable, illuminating. The only correct answer is the one which illuminates the way in which the alternatives and consequences are evaluated. The question goes to the heart of the processes which inform good judgment. It also creates an opportunity to grapple with the most difficult challenge which the most highly-valued administrators face with grace and tact -- expressing themselves persuasively and constructively.
Diplomacy is sometimes the art of avoiding saying anything which might possibly cause a ripple of a problem to arise; and many appear to have been persuaded that this kind of non-specific diplomatic prose will serve Wikipedia's broader, long-term objectives. I see the merit in that cautious, restrained attitude; however, in my view, in this very limited setting, that approach is misplaced. This is a unique opportunity and a more revealing answer to a difficult question should be seen as appropriate, seemly, and welcome. --Tenmei (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Re [1]: Just a note that I always notify users when I indent one of their !votes. I decided against indenting that neutral because of the close temporal proximity and wasn't sure which one really reflected ErikTheBikeMan's views. It doesn't do much harm to have Tangobot parse a double !vote for a short time either, so I just notified ETBM of the situation here. OTOH, I notice he has edited since then and doesn't appear to mind, so you probably did the right thing. Everyme18:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions about User:Asenine. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thanks for uploading Image:Procter and Gamble Logo.svg. 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).
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
-_Good_pic.jpg)
Done: [2] Everyme 20:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)