User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox

Samples of GimmeBot steps for archive/promote FACs and Keep/Remove FARs

User:SandyGeorgia/Withdrawn FAC

{{hide|bg1=CornflowerBlue|contentcss=border:1px CornflowerBlue solid; |headercss=color:white; |header= Resolved, ~~~~ |content=
sample of how to put header on junk inside }}

I am traveling until Sept 30 and have limited and slow internet access. If you leave a message here, please don't expect a prompt response.

• How to do special contribs: [1]

• To find old diff:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Article_title&action=history&offset=200806dd000100

	Nice job on "Miss Ima"!
	To all of the excellent editors who were part of the Karanacs-led collaboration to bring Ima Hogg to featured status, it was a pleasure working with you on such a fine article about a great lady. Thank you so much for your contribution to this fun collaboration. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)	File:Ima large.jpg

Add 1(f) to the featured article criteria:

1. It is—
• (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
• ...
• (e) stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process;
• (f) original: if it contains text copied from public domain sources, that text is encased in quote marks or blocked-and-quoted, with citation to the source.

• Malta Test Station; plagiarism, stayed on mainpage with copyvio tag, got almost 3,000 hits, ANI
• Spring Canyon, Utah; WP:Close paraphrasing and non-reliable, commercial source, found at RFA
• Jameela Jamil; non-reliable sources, BLP, on mainpage but DYK pulled it as soon as I let them know, DYK Talk
• Black Eyed Kids; non-reliable sources, notability not established, only one RS, I alerted DYK and they still ran it on mainpage with maintenance tags, DYK talk Was previously deleted, then recreated, still no reliable sources, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Eyed Kids (3rd nomination)
• William S. Stevens; WP:Close paraphrasing and structure, SG talk discussion during RFA

New

• Mutant Girls Squad, on mainpage but pulled by DYK as soon as I pointed it out, blatant plagiarism [2]
• Steven Girvin, to be evaluated for close paraphrasing
• Alladi Ramakrishnan, plagiarized and almost entirely based on an article written by his son (WP:V)
• Mukta Barve, close paraphrasing, "lifetime of servitude to local deity", dubious sourcing
• Seven Gates of Hell, close paraphrasing, main source can't be checked because subscription is required, but

• "Others say that, completely unrelated to the asylum story, an eccentric physician who lived on the property built several gates along a path deep into the forest."

vs.

• "to an eccentric local doctor who erected a large gate at the entrance to his property, and rumors sprang up that there was a series of gates beyond that one along a road leading deep into the woods"

from the second source, which is not reliable because it uses Wikipedia as a reference. On the main page now.

• Brown Lady of Raynham Hall, on the main page now, main source is not a reliable source, also a commercial website, [3], entire paragraph is uncited. Completely plagiarized from that source. Pulled from the mainpage when I notified ANI. Checked two more DKYs from same editor, they don't use reliable sources, didn't check them for plagiarism.

My mistakes in my haste to evaluate (these were on the mainpage, leading me to act too quickly)

• José Sisto, thought it was a BLP
• Acheron class torpedo boat; did not find source, which turned out to be below the citation section

Reminder to thank Scott MacDonald

"Jaw flapping"

"Jaw flapping malcontent"

Original diffs here

After my polite queries—and in spite of unanimous consensus or feedback against his admin action from five admins (Dabomb87, twice, Ucucha, Iridescent, Bkonrad, and Orlady), and several queries on his talk that he address the situation—Nyttend continued to NOTHEARTHAT, not respond to me, not acknowledge the original inaccurate allegation of vandalism, and allege that my edit summary contained vandalism and an attack: at 20:15

Simple solution offered at 20:17

Followed by another at 21.58, to which Nyttend responded, "... I don't feel like bothering with the situation"

And another at 00:23

• From WP:ADMIN

• Adminship is granted indefinitely, and is only removed upon request or under circumstances involving high-level intervention (see administrator abuse below).
• Administrators are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. ... Most especially, administrators should strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy and civility to other editors and to one another.

• 2) Wikipedia editors are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as ... assumptions of bad faith ... is prohibited.

• Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed.
• Administrators who seriously, or repeatedly, act in a problematic manner or have lost the trust or confidence of the community may be sanctioned or have their access removed. In the past, this has happened or been suggested for:

• 4. Failure to communicate – this can be either to users (e.g., lack of suitable warnings or explanations of actions), or to concerns of the community (especially when explanations or other serious comments are sought).

• If a user thinks an administrator has acted improperly against him/her or another editor, he or she should express their concerns directly to the administrator responsible and try to come to a resolution in an orderly and civil manner.