User talk:The Rambling Man: Difference between revisions

I will get to every FLC and I will reply to comments I made on them. No need to hit me with "talkback" templates. If you're feeling particularly WP:BOLD, leave me a message here and update my to-do list! By the way, while I have admin and 'crat flags, I'm foremost commenting here as an editor. I am entitled to an opinion. If you think I've misused my admin tools or misused the 'crat tools, feel free to initiate their removal. Just let me know. Cheers!!

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Hi, kindly let me know if you're interested in nominating this for FLC. You had asked me long back about the Sobers' list, which I totally forgot while nominating. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 05:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Count me in. I'm hoping to clear my "deck" in the next few days so I can dedicate a day or so to catching up here. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed your discussion with User:Rschen7754 at Talk:California State Route 52. I had an experience at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads#WikiProject overlap, where i became frustrated with the idea that California highways should be tagged exclusively by the Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/California banner, as they claim they are the only body who are able to set appropriate standards for those articles, and have worked enough on them to have exclusive claim to any class jumps. I have no doubt that they DO have excellent standards and have probably been significantly responsible for the excellent quality of many of the articles, but i could find no policy which allows any wikiproject to "own" a set of articles, or deny other projects the right to "claim" FA, GA, etc (and be responsible for starts and stubs as well, which i have laboriously done for the sfba task force). I have decided to not add the Wikipedia:WikiProject California/San Francisco Bay Area task force banner to any articles on highways which run exclusively through the region, despite my gut telling me that if an article's subject matter lies completely within the scope of a project, it should be coded as such (like all California Wikiproject articles are part of the US wikiproject, et cetera). I feel this means the task force is being left deliberately incomplete by me, and is excluding some vital articles, such as the Cypress Structure, which is a major topic for the bay area. There's really nothing i can do about this, as im not an administrator, but I can at least inform you of my experience. maybe over time there will be some movement to better codify policy around projects, to make sure ownership doesnt become an issue in this area (of all things to own!) PS I will admit that i feel like i own the SFBA project, but only because no one is really working on it right now. i would welcome others ideas, but what can i do if no one wants to work on it right now?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:19, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You placed {{refimprove}} to Akutagawa Prize. Please clarify how it should be improved since major portion of the article is the list of works which is backed by the referenced official web site, and most other paragraphs are also covered by inline citations already. --Fukumoto (talk) 14:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me, for example, where the "Current members..." section is referenced? The "Special occurrences" section? The point is that we shouldn't be using just external links to reference information like this. Please see WP:REF. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a RFC at to talk:List of Israeli cities#RfC: Are Israeli settlements Israeli cities? about weather the articles inclusion of Israeli settlements (with city status) as "Israeli cities" in this context original research, or otherwise problematic. I'm telling you this because you were a participant at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Israeli cities where, by my understanding, it was decided to call them "Israeli cities" and the purpose of the RFC is to review that decision. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll have to see I have the energy to engage in such a debate. I doubt it, if I'm honest. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're under no obligation to engage in a debate, a simple comment would be perfectly acceptable. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. I have a lot of RL issues and on-wiki stress, so I can't promise anything. We'll see. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're under no obligation to do anything at WP (comment, debate, or otherwise), we're all volunteers and sometimes we seem to forget that. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand all that. As I've said, I'll see what I can do. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I imagine Medeis is referring to these diffs: [1] [2], although they might also mean [exchange]. Yes, I'm a bit of an asshole about this.

On the other hand, I'd like to refer to the following items: [3] [4] [5], three threads starting here: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. (In short, repeated very POINTy behaviour at ITN/C, though not the worst, and wildly derailing behaviour at RD, combined with over-zealous policing of the 'no legal/medical advice' rule, bordering on WP:OWN-type behaviour. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, Medeis' behaviour is definitely noted! The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And now this: [11]! AlexTiefling (talk) 10:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous. Still, at least we know what Meds gets up to in its spare time. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And now the Meds have moved to my talk page. Whatever next? I had hoped I could keep at least one part of Wikipedia free from its pointlessness... Clicks "play-record"... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Many happies
	From the similarly venerable Dweller (talk) 12:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Check out the response I just made at the Humanities Ref Desk. I thought you might really enjoy turning my redlink blue. Alternatively, you might quite enjoy ignoring it altogether. --Dweller (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TRM- I've been working to secure additional reviews for my FLC by contacting editors of other numismatic articles. I was able to get at least one additional review (and possibly a second on the way), but it took place on the Talk page of the FLC... With the reviewer's permission, I copied it verbatim to the formal review/discussion page. I am now waiting for that person to give it a formal support. I wanted to make sure I hadn't done anything incorrect (wrong/rule violation) in the process. Thanks--Godot13 (talk) 21:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First round of reaching out was able to secure one additional review (support) bringing the tally to 3.5 4.5 support vs 1 oppose. Is there a general target number I should be aiming for (i.e., how broad a net should I cast in my effort to recruit additional reviewers?). Thanks--Godot13 (talk) 18:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question - do you consider this to be a list? --Rschen7754 20:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't, there's a listy element to it, but I don't think the FLC community would think it suitable. FAC is the way forward I suppose! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quit addressing me by perversions of my user name, it's uncivil. μηδείς (talk) 19:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meds? You told me I needed Meds! I have ceased to address "you", just discuss your ongoing disruption. Oh, and "more Meds"! While you're here, stop using Wikipedia as Twitter. Finally, Pot/kettle. Stop your own "perversions" first! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meds advocating sex with animals... Very, very odd (odder, or otter).... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:00, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please cease this endless following me from thread to thread, the endless provocation, the name calling. Just step back and leave me alone. You are an admin, please act like it. With all due respect, he next step is an ANI report. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]