User talk:Thibbs/Archive 10

Hello. Thank you for your EBSCO approval for my application, but I didn't realize giving my true identity was a requirement. I don't feel completely safe doing that at this time. I'm sorry I didn't realize this beforehand. Thanks again though. Wolfdog (talk) 23:30, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no worries, Wolfdog. Please feel free to apply again at a future date. In the meanwhile, I would suggest utilizing WP:RX for any one-off documents you are interested in. There are numerous editors there with university access (which often includes EBSCO access) who would be happy to help you track down any specific sources. Happy editing. -Thibbs (talk) 02:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry for the late reply (that the original thread is now in the archive...)!

The transliteration you requested would be Wikiproject:Video Game - yes, that's the same from English, because I just found out that the term is just a literal translation of English Term "Wikiproject" and "Video Game".

Sorry it took that long for this simple thing! — regards, Revi 07:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@-revi: - Thanks for your help, but I'm curious if there is a different revised romanization (RR) that we could use instead of using the English. For example, in the article Blade & Soul (a Korean video game), we see 『블레이드 앤 소울』 being transliterated as "Beulleideu aen soul" (which is clearly a direct translation of the English "Blade and Soul"). This is something we see a lot at WP:VG when it comes to Japanese games which are almost always rendered in romaji as well as English and Japanese even though they are really just direct translations (examples: 1, 2, 3, etc.).

Without using the English as a guide, might 『위키프로젝트:비디오 게임』 be rendered anything close to "Wikipeulojegteu:Bidio geim"? Or would something like "Wikipeurojekteu:Bidio Geim" be better? Is there a better Romanization? Or is the translation ("Wikiproject:Video Game") the closest we could come to a transliteration? Thanks again for your help! -Thibbs (talk) 20:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that. Wi^[1]ki^[2]peu^[3]ro^[4]jek^[5]teu^[6]: bi^[7]di^[8]o^[9] ge^[10]im^[11] (Wikipeurojekteu:bidiogeim)

Sources
^ 위 ^ 키 ^ 프 ^ 로, ㄹ can be both r and l, so l might be used too. ^ 젝 ^ 트 ^ 비 ^ 디 ^ 오 ^ 게 ^ 임

I clearly misinterpreted your question then, sorry! — regards, Revi 11:14, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, -revi! -Thibbs (talk) 19:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Stgigaprize.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

•  Redundant Duplicate report? Anyway the irony is thick. I just bought another Satellaview magazine today and my time is still too limited to put in the work required to show that the image is helpful. Why am I gathering sources if I don't have the time to collate them? Who knows... Given that there are no conceivable legal threats to Wikipedia via the hosting of this image (NFUR proudly displayed at the file page and permission of photographer filed with OTRS), the utility of the proposed deletion rather escapes me and I confess that this feels a bit like the elevation of bureaucracy over reason, but I've already given my opinion on the topic the first go-round and I suspect I wouldn't have anything especially illuminating to add to the discussion this time either. Thanks all the same for the alert. Good luck with everything. -Thibbs (talk) 00:58, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Small Soldiers: Squad Commander has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

whole article is copied from another wiki. no source

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sulaimandaud (talk) 20:26, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sulaimandaud - Prod isn't available for redirects. I created this redirect 6 years ago and to be honest I completely forgot it existed. If you look at the history of the page you can see that it was only expanded into an article 3 days ago by User:DoctorHver. Was that who you were trying to warn? Have you considered, by the way, that a better route than WP:PROD might be a targeted WP:REVDEL (if you suspect that it's a copyvio) and then simply returning the page to a redirect as it's been for the last 6 years? -Thibbs (talk) 23:41, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thibbs: Please accept my sincerest apologies, I'll remove the PROD and undid the revision done by User:DoctorHver.

PS: This was added as edit summary by user:doctorHver "These are two completely different games the PS1 game which is thrid person shooter, while the PC game is a stragedy game" Sulaimandaud (talk) 23:54, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'll look into the claims made by DoctorHver's edit summary as soon as I get a chance. -Thibbs (talk) 00:13, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I brought this up at Talk:Index of Windows games. I would like your view on this suggestion. Any comments? Thank you. Deltasim (talk) 08:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Y I responded at the talk page there. -Thibbs (talk) 17:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:StGigaBSXBios.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 　-Thibbs (talk) 13:16, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I posted a response on my talk page and your talk page here just to make sure you got the message.

Thanks so much for doing this! Your interview page is here. You'll get a chance to see my final version of the article. Also, I'll let you and the others know where you can see each other's responses. I'm posting this on your talk page also to make sure you see it.

Best Regards,

Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 18:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'll get some responses posted this weekend. -Thibbs (talk) 13:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs, Thank you for you suggestions and thoughts for our recommendation project! We really appreciate that, and hope we did a good job in incorporating your feedback so far. I wonder if you'd like to participate our study personally? We are starting with three projects for now, WPVG, WPHIST, and WPMED, and will add couple more projects later. It would be great to have you onboard! Please see my user talk page for participation. Thanks! Bobo.03 (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll participate. Thanks for letting me know. -Thibbs (talk) 18:49, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Our system generated a list of potential new editors for your project. They may be interested in collaborating with your project members to on your project's articles. As you will notice, the list contains both experienced editors and newcomers. Both are valuable for Wikipedia and your project. Please go ahead and introduce your project to them, and point them to some project tasks to start with. We also provide a template invitation message to make it easier to contact the potential new editors. Just click the invite link to write the invitation message.

We'd appreciate it if you could fill the survey to let us know what you think about our recommendations so we can improve our system.

Bobo.03 (talk) 13:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Y I've invited some editors from this list and filled out the surveys. Thank you for your efforts to develop an editor recruitment/editor retention program for us. With a few tweaks I'm certain this will be an asset to the encyclopedia. -Thibbs (talk) 18:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Thibbs! I appreciate your participation and support so much! Yes, I will keep working on it to make it more effective. Bobo.03 (talk) 02:55, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Thibbs Datagod here, thank you for the invitation. I am a video game enthusiast and photographer. I would greatly enjoy being part of the project. I have been donating some of my work to the wikimedia organization and am pleased to see people using those images in various places. I focus mostly in classic arcade games and the culture that sprang up around them. datagod (talk) 🍁 18:45, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good to hear from you, datagod! The area of classic arcade games is one that could definitely use some help! We used to have an Arcade Task Force back in the day, but in recent years things have been more centralized at WikiProject Video games. Specifically, most of the project-wide discussions take place at WT:VG. If you'd like to check out some suggestions specific to the formatting of arcade-related articles, one of the best places to look is at this old version of the Arcade Task Force. Anyway thanks for your interest and I hope I see you around! -Thibbs (talk) 19:10, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thibbs, I am still a new editor trying my best to learn protocol. Can I ask you to look into a page that I have been editing? U.S._National_Video_Game_Team Several Anonymous IP users keep reverting my changes and making wild accusations. My interest is in the readability and flow. They also appear to have a vendetta against a former member of the team and do whatever they can to erase her. I am trying to avoid an edit war but I don't see how at this point. Thank you in advance.datagod (talk) 🍁 15:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • datagod - I will take a look at the situation tonight. I can see there's an editing conflict right now and my personal advice is to hold back on editing there for now. There's no time limit on this issue and problematic IP editors will often lose interest if there's no ongoing back-and-forth. You should be aware that one common pitfall that I nearly got caught in when I was new is Wikipedia's three-revert rule. So it's not worth getting involved in a back-and-forth in mainspace. The talk page is a different matter and that's where the arguments should be hashed out, but the main thing to focus on is that reliable sources trump everything. If the conflict (which I just barely skimmed) is about whether or not Carrie Swidecki is a member of the team then you'll need to find reliable sources that back you up. There is a "custom search engine" for video game related topics here. That should help to locate reliable sources. If there is solid corroboration from the reliable sources (RSes) for your claim then the IP will have to rebut them with other RSes or his edits will be considered disruptive and can lead to him getting blocked and the page protected against further edits. Anyway I'll take a look later tonight and leave a note on your talk page about how to proceed. -Thibbs (talk) 16:14, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you very much. I'll leave the page for now, following your advice.
        • datagod - I've gone over the history. It goes back quite a ways and I'm not at all sure that I understand all of the intricacies, but I've left a comment there to direct you to dispute resolution. For what it's worth, I think the the IP is probably right that the details of the trademark and the charitable contribution (issues from July) are not necessary to include, and I think you're right that "Billy Mitchell" should go by the name used in the Wikipedia article, that the names should be ordered alphabetically by last name, and that Carrie Swidecki probably belongs on the roster. I have no solid opinion whether Walter Day should be listed as founder or co-founder. As far as dispute resolution is concerned, I think the best best would be to post at WT:VG to ask for help. It might be a good idea to point out that you're a new editor and that you were unaware of the 3-revert rule, but that you've completely stopped editing the article for now until the underlying issues are resolved. I can try to help, but my time is rather limited this weekend and next week. -Thibbs (talk) 05:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thank you very much for looking into this. I will follow your advice. datagod (talk) 🍁 05:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much for the kind offer Thibbs, but I've been pretty busy lately, and don't think I would be able to contribute effectively should I join. You can see from my editing history that I just haven't been editing a lot. When things free up a bit I will definitely consider this, but for now I will have to pass on the opportunity. Once again, thank you. Zamaster4536 (talk) 06:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can definitely appreciate where you're coming from, Zamaster4536. My own off-wiki schedule is frequently hectic and has cut deeply into my editing time lately. Anyway hopefully we'll see you around when things get less busy for you some time down the road! -Thibbs (talk) 23:28, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, thanks for the offer. I've thought about joining the project many times before, but the truth of the matter is my knowledge of video games is really quite narrow. I only really have extensive knowledge in a couple of video games, nothing compared to the hundreds of video games within the scope of your project. I may consider it later on, but for now I don't think I'll be of much help. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 04:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no requirement that you be knowledgeable about the entire scope that the WikiProject covers, but that's OK. One of my main objectives here was simply to raise awareness of the WikiProject as a resource for those who might not know about it. Keep us in mind if you have a video game related question! The editors who hang out at the project's talk page are generally very friendly and non-judgmental about narrowness of familiarity with all games. :) -Thibbs (talk) 05:07, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Hope you are doing well, and thank you for participating our study. I have improved our system based on the feedbacks I received last time. It's been about two week, how do you think about those recommended editors so far?

Currently, I am preparing the second batch of recommendations, and will be sending it out in the next couple days. Just to check in with you, and make sure that you'd like to see the next batch. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 16:43, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bobo.03, sorry for the delay. I've been out of town for the last several days and I couldn't respond. I saw your follow-up note and will try to issue invitations this weekend. -Thibbs (talk) 11:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Casali brothers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casali brothers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Y Thanks for the alert. -Thibbs (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

We made some changes and improvement in our system, and generated a second batch of recommendations for WPVG. We'd appreciate it if you could fill the survey to let us know what you think about our recommendations so we can improve our system.

Hi Bobo.03, sorry for the delay. I've been out of town for the last several days and I couldn't respond earlier. I will try to send out invitations this weekend. -Thibbs (talk) 11:40, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs, no worries! I was worrying that I spammed your talk page.. Thank you for your help! Bobo.03 (talk) 14:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. Offline life has become rather busy for me just recently. I hope things will calm down a bit. :) -Thibbs (talk) 04:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, and hope everything is going well! Also, please fill the surveys if you have a chance. Thank you :) Bobo.03 (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All is going well, I'm just buried by work right now. I think late October will be back to normal. I've just sent out the surveys, by the way. Good luck with it! -Thibbs (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some preliminary analysis on the impact of recruitment on editors in our first batch. The results are very promising! I compare the number of edits those editors made before the recruitment in two weeks and the edits after the recruitment in two weeks, and find that their edits increased by 73% on articles within the project on average, while the number of edits of editors who were in the control group (editors who were also recommended by our system, but were not shown to any organizer nor recruited) decreased by 42%. So thank you for your great help! But now, we only have 40 editors that were invited by our participants. So when you are not that busy, you are welcome to continue our study and help contribute more data points for us and invite more editors for your project! Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 00:35, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will take a look when things are less busy. -Thibbs (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

You reviewed my latest Wikipedia library application but placed it on hold because no email address was associated with it. I'm not sure why that's the case, I have an email address registered - used for my other two applications. Would you mind checking this out? Triptothecottage (talk) 05:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Triptothecottage: I'm afraid I am unable to locate an email address for you at en.Wikipedia. You may have deleted or disabled it in the period since you registered. I did find a working email for you at Commons, however, so I have sent you a follow-up note there under the assumption that Commons is your "home wiki" mentioned at Wikipedia:EBSCO#Requirements. You will need to provide the additional information that I requested in the email I sent to you before I can proceed with your application, though. Sorry for the confusion and please let me know if you need me to re-send the follow-up note. -Thibbs (talk) 11:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, can you take a look at GameFan 11 from October 93 and see what coverage of MUSHA is there for me? Thanks! TarkusAB^talk 15:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's a single-page spread of the game in an 11-page feature on shooters. I've posted a copy of this page on your talk page. Thanks for your recent good work at that article. Your efforts have really made a difference! -Thibbs (talk) 23:36, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bobo.03 (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Y - Thanks, responded by email. -Thibbs (talk) 04:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Y - Thanks, responded by email. -Thibbs (talk) 04:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thibbs! I hate to impede on your time, but not having access to Project MUSE is severely impeding my Wikipedia editing, currently (in the past three hours) I have found three instances where I could use this access being approved. It would be nice if you could get to it. If you can't, no worries. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, you aren't bothering me with your questions Eddie891. The review process can sometimes take a bit of time and I know this can be frustrating for applicants in situations where immediate access might be required. I can see that your application was only submitted 3 or 4 days ago, but if your situation is one of those emergency situations I would advise you to seek help at Wikipedia's Resource Request page until Smmurphy (who is the TWL account coordinator for Project MUSE) can process your application. I don't have the authority to get to it myself, but I'm sure Smmurphy is currently working to complete the evaluation and I am confident that you will hear back before too long. -Thibbs (talk) 02:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: Just to follow up, I generally wait a week or two between submitting applications so that I can submit two or three at once. Once I submit, Muse gets back to me quickly. I'm away from my office this week, but will try to submit the current batch by early next week. Thank you for your patience! Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thibbs,

according to your userpage, the WP:VG Google custom search engine for reliable sources has not been update since February last year, and the respective page in the WikiProject has some new entries standing for months now. Hence, I wondered if you are still actively working on it? If not, I'd be ready to take over/contribute to its development directly by incorporating the outstanding requests and maintaining it further. Since I am also a frequent user of the tool, it would be a win-win situation. Lordtobi (✉) 12:22, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lordtobi, thanks for the kind offer. You're right that the search engine needs to be updated soon (the history on my page isn't accurate - December 2016 is the accurate date) because it's fallen out of date. I'm currently just finishing up the year at work off-wiki so I don't have much time to spare, but I promise I'll look into the feasibility of your offer as soon as I get a moment. Thanks again for your kind offer and please ping me if I haven't gotten back to you in a reasonable time. -Thibbs (talk) 02:40, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it's been just over a month since our conversation, would you consider this a "reasonable time"? Lordtobi (✉) 21:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lordtobi - Sorry for my delay. I've been discussing your proposal, but I've been slowed down due to medical reasons and so I apologize, but I'm keeping this on my radar and I'll try to get a response as quickly as possible. -Thibbs (talk) 04:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time; nobody's in a rush. Just let me know when you got new info. Lordtobi (✉) 13:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordtobi: - I've just launches an RfC on the topic so we can get community input for the best way to go forward. Thanks for helping me to inspire this needed discussion. -Thibbs (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thibbs. I'm looking to make improvements to X-Men: Children of the Atom and I came across your username through WP:VG's reference library while looking for sources. Would you be willing to provide me scans of Issue 4(9) of PC Gamer? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Wani (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wani, I will look into this as soon as I get a moment. Please ping me if I haven't gotten back to you in a reasonable period. -Thibbs (talk) 02:41, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wani:, I've left a note on your talk page. -Thibbs (talk) 03:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Hyrule Fantasy: Zelda no Densetsu. Since you had some involvement with the The Hyrule Fantasy: Zelda no Densetsu redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y Thanks for the alert. -Thibbs (talk) 15:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Legend of Zelda 2: Rinku no Bōken. Since you had some involvement with the The Legend of Zelda 2: Rinku no Bōken redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y Thanks for the alert. -Thibbs (talk) 15:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Hope you are doing well! Thank you for using our tool, and giving us feedback for improvement. We've made some improvements, and are preparing to send another round of recommendations for your project. But before that, we are considering two possible factors to implement into our algorithms potentially, and wonder what's your opinion on them.

1. Small project promotion. An editor who has a wide range of subject interest can be recommended to multiple projects according to our current algorithms. When this happens, do you think it matters to make choices among those projects, i.e., should we prioritize on those smaller projects, just randomly choose one project, or do you have other thoughts?

2. Female editor promotion. Gender imbalance has been a long-term issue in Wikipedia which consequently caused the uncoverage of many female related topics. What do you think about the idea of promoting more female editors in the recommendation list? Bobo.03 (talk) 19:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, Bobo.03. The health issues which were affecting me are nearly resolved now and I am going to go thorough the recommendation request below next. Regarding your two opinion questions, I think they both sound like good tweaks to the tool. I took a peak in on Czar's talk page and I agree with him about the potential for Small project promotion and my own feeling that I would "want to be recommended for any WikiProject area relevant to my editing, big or small". The potential for fatigue that Czar brings up is a worthy consideration, though. Likewise, the potential of Female editor promotion excites me and I appreciate your efforts to develop this important improvement. Again I find myself in agreement with Czar's assessment: "I'd recommend a slight preference". Thanks for your help and I will tackle the recommendation next. -Thibbs (talk) 15:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Our system generated a list of potential new editors for your project. They may be interested in collaborating with your project members on your project's articles. As you will notice, the list contains both experienced editors and newcomers. Both are valuable for Wikipedia and your project. Please go ahead and introduce your project to them, and point them to some project tasks to start with. We also provide a template invitation message to make it easier to contact the potential new editors. Just click the invite link to write the invitation message.

We'd appreciate it if you could fill the survey to let us know what you think about our recommendations so we can improve our system.

• I've just completed the invites and surveys (a little late). The only bug was that one of the invitees Bohy97 was repeated twice. Thanks for your help with your system, Bobo.03, and I would be happy to help assist in your further work any time. -Thibbs (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, Thibbs! Hope you are feeling better! Yes, I've fixed that bug, and will probably send you one or two more lists in the future weeks. Best, Bobo.03 (talk) 17:28, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am asking you to reconsider your decline of my application. I was general in my request, because I think library reviewers ususally review contribution history before declining applications, and I thought the reason for my request would be fairly obvious from my work recent work on medieval English law. I already have a range of sources for international and U.S. law where I am also active, but I'm rather upset it was declined, because the Selden Society Publications and the History of Early English Law is a major resource for a topic area I am very active in that I don't otherwise have access to and where sources are otherwise very hard to come by - I was hoping the applications could be accepted sooner rather than later. Seraphim System ^(talk) 06:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your further clarification, Seraphim System. I appreciate your attention to this matter and I will do my best to respond in a timely manner. For the present, in the interest of combining our discussion, we should continue our discussion at the The Wikipedia Library Card Platform where I will be happy to assist you with further explanation. -Thibbs (talk) 12:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thibbs:, thanks I replied there - it might be a good idea to update the template to indicate that there is a wait? I don't think it is protected so I could do it, but I don't want to change it unilaterally. Seraphim System ^(talk) 12:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good thought but the WP:TWL Library Card Platform is where those changes should be made. I will take a look at changing that. -Thibbs (talk) 13:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seraphim System - I'm sorry for taking so long to get back to you, Seraphim System. I am recently retired from working with WP:TWL. My health has been interfering too much to be effective and I have retired from that work. Best wishes. -Thibbs (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thibbs: No worries, I found what I needed. Best wishes Seraphim System ^(talk) 13:18, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the CSE often does not find some articles from GameSpot, for whatever reason. E.g. the article "Take 2 Captures Tarantula", about the acquisition of Spidersoft by Take-Two Interactive, is not found through the CSE. I'm not sure if this is due to location restrictions (I'm based in Germany), but maybe you could check this too? Other reasons might include improper https checking, do you have to differentiate those at configuration? Lordtobi (✉) 17:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y Lordtobi, thanks for the heads-up. I will look into it and report back by tonight at the latest. -Thibbs (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordtobi: - Hmmm, I tweaked the http-vs-https issue but that didn't seem to bear any fruit. Then I went through a number of experiments none of which gave me correct results. I finally got deeply into an issue related to requesting from Google to gain permission to alter its algorithm (I'm hoping to convert the tool into a nonprofit tool which should reduce Google's influence on the product), but at this point I'm still waiting to hear from someone I wrote to around noon and I have had little luck in working further with this issue. I wish I could have given you a better update, but I'll continue working on the issue tomorrow. Sorry for the trouble. -Thibbs (talk) 05:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Truly odd, maybe @Czar has an idea? Lordtobi (✉) 09:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that there may be an issue with the filtering, but at this point I'm still making experiments. Czar, I appreciate your effort looking at this as well. Let me know if you want to coordinate our efforts to dig into this. Otherwise I will continue for now to pursue to nonprofit angle in the hopes that this will have some effect on the algorithm (I don't want to speak negatively about Google, but I had read a rumor online that sometimes Google will add its own special filters to exclude search results in rare situations and although it's unlikely, that's all I can think of for now... Maybe Google is opposed to "SpiderSoft Ltd." or something like that... Kidding, kinda.). -Thibbs (talk) 12:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• This is a strange case. I removed all filters (general and delimiter) for Gamespot and added back just "gamespot.com". Result: The search still won't find "take 2 captures tarantula". However, I made a brand new CSE and only added that same filter ("gamespot.com"), and lo, it included "take 2 captures tarantula". So my hunch is that another URL string or CSE setting is interfering in the WPVG CSE. But I went through all of the URL entries to see if a wildcard might be scrubbing this part of Gamespot by accident... and I didn't find anything applicable. czar 17:27, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm going to document more of my process here. I searched for other Gamespot posts from the same day ("April 28, 2000") and found that:
  • https://www.gamespot.com/articles/indy-racing-league-2000-preview/1100-2557972/ would NOT appear in the WPVG CSE but appeared in my Gamespot-only CSE
  • Same for https://www.gamespot.com/articles/secret-drivers-for-cart-appear-on-the-web/1100-2462386/
  • However, https://www.gamespot.com/articles/tekken-3-release-date-confirmed/1100-2462586/ appeared in both CSEs

This would indicate that it's likely not a URL filter issue? Are there any non-default CSE features that would limit sites based on their contents rather than simple URL values? czar 17:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think it is bound to the date either, this article (from 2009) is also not found via the CSE. Other articles include [1][2][3], although these were also updated (not published) in April 2000. Lordtobi (✉) 18:08, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks like I won't hear back about the nonprofit idea until Monday, but that aside I just added an exclusion that was requested here. I haven't documented this exclusion at WP:VG/SE yet, but right now the 4 other exclusions (<http://www.gamespot.com/*/cheats/>, <http://www.gamespot.com/*/*/forums/*>, <http://www.gamespot.com/*/forums/*>, and <http://www.gamespot.com/forums/*>) are also listed at VG/SE so we'll have to clean it all up when we're finished with our experiments here. It's hard for me to come up with anything. I had tried comparing details of the source-codes for the original "Take 2 Captures Tarantula" article (noticed by Lordtobi) and this random GS article which does show up in the search results, but the only difference I can see is the content... I'll take a look tomorrow at looking for patterns between the "Take 2 Captures Tarantula" article and the "Indy Racing League 2000 Preview" and "Secret Drivers for CART Appear on the Web" articles found by Czar. -Thibbs (talk) 04:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Spent some more time on this today and I'm still getting those hits in my vanilla test search that don't show in the WPVG CSE. My hunch is that one of the exclusion wildcards is doing some damage and it'll take some surgery to find the root. Thibbs, can you please export a copy of the "CSE annotations" XML for me, under Setup > Advanced? I'll load/test it in another CSE instance. (I can only access "CSE context" XML as the non-owner, which are all the other settings apart from the URL list.) czar 17:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure. Check your email, Czar. I'm going to continue to pursue this nonprofit idea which is slowly going through the bureaucratic process which is kind of stalled at WMF at this point, but I recently wrote a follow-up request and I was assured that they are currently trying to work on the problem so hopefully it will be sooner rather than later. I've filled you in with the details in the email. -Thibbs (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Any update on this issue? Either way, if the main CSE is currently not being tested on, the GameSpot filters should probably be reset as the forums are still/again showing up in the search results. Cheers! Lordtobi (✉) 19:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No luck on my end at this point. The nonprofit aspect seems to have stalled. I can try to prompt them again since it seems like something that the WMF should be interested in gaining access to this in general (even if they don't particularly care about supporting like WP:VG)... I'll also look into the filters today if they haven't been restored yet. -Thibbs (talk) 12:35, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Hope you are doing well. I am sending a new list of recommendations for VG. Please take a look when you have a chance. Thank you!

• @Bobo.03: - I've completed the invites and surveys. Two minor bugs: (1) For User:InfinityWiki the tool reports "InfinityWiki made 57 out of their most recent 51 edits" which may be a reversed figure. Personally I count 48 VG-related edits of the most recent 55 edits (with 55 edits as the total number made since account creation). (2) User:Film Atom has been blocked as a sockpuppet since 2/25/18. Unless this list was generated prior to this date, this user should probably have been screened. Otherwise everything looks good. Thanks again for your tweaks. -Thibbs (talk) 17:23, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These two things look weird, and should not happen. I will look into the code to fix them. Thanks for pointing them out! Bobo.03 (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• • Oh one other thing: I don't know if you've implemented the idea we discussed in February about promoting female editorship, but if so my gut feeling is that you're handling things correctly. I think that if gender is included in any way in the tool, it is important for the inviters like me not to know the genders of the suggested invitees before I invite anyone. I try to invite everyone in exactly the same way anyway, but if an inviter were to personalize each invitation (which in fact might be a more effective way of inviting newcomers) then the invitation should in my view avoid dwelling on the gender issue as it might turn off some newcomers who would prefer to be treated as people than as a promoted class. My thoughts are not completely concretized at this point, however, because I can conceive of a counter-argument that rhetoric could be used to excite members of the promoted class which could lead to better retention in which case the inviter would have to know the gender of the invitee. So I suppose it depends on how the invitation is handled. Anyway that's something that might take further thought. -Thibbs (talk) 17:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts and perspective on this. Yeah, I think they are reasonable points. It's definitely worth more thinking and maybe research. I actually did not do anything yet for female editors for two reasons. One concern is about the impact of introducing female editors to projects. I am just putting a previous study about it, but avoid commenting anything on it for potential controversy :) (You can take a quick look at it if you are interested) The other is about the implementation costs. It might take one or two months to develop and train a model to effectively identify female editors. So I guess I will just leave it for now. Have a good weekend! Bobo.03 (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs! Sorry to bother you, and doubly sorry to see that you're under the weather. If my following request is too much, please let me know and I'll try to figure something else out.

Since last year, I've been involved in a long-term project to add award data (winners and nominees) to PC game articles. My method is to obtain scans or archived webpages of a publication's award ceremony, and then work through the entire thing, adding whatever winners/nominees/commentary I can glean from it to every related page on Wikipedia. I've already done this for a sizable number of PC Gamer, CGW and Computer Games Magazine ceremonies, but my options are starting to thin out. However, I noticed that you're listed as owning PC Gamer's March 2003 and March 2005 issues, which contain the magazine's 9th and 11th annual awards. I realize that it's a huge undertaking to scan two award ceremonies (totaling probably 20 pages or more), but I haven't been able to locate these anywhere else online. As I said—if it's too much, let me know! If you do have time, though, I would massively appreciate the chance to get my hands on these awards. Thanks for your time. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JimmyBlackwing: - No worries. I have some free time tomorrow and I'll try to get these scans done then. If I can't get it done tomorrow, then I'll definitely be able by next weekend. Please ping me again on the 23rd-24th or that weekend if I haven't got it out by this Saturday. -Thibbs (talk) 02:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Thanks a ton! JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:45, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These look phenomenal! Thanks so much. I don't think I'll have any trouble with the bleeding words, since they all seem to be legible enough to guess with context. I'll get to work adding these to articles soon! JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'm glad for every opportunity to help a fellow WP:VG Reference Librarian, JimmyBlackwing. -Thibbs (talk) 11:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Goodwill Ambassador Award. Since you had some involvement with the Goodwill Ambassador Award redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Legacypac (talk) 05:33, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y - Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I got your message. Don't sweat about the work. I have lived with ME-CFS for decades now (Ironically, I'm being tested for something else at the moment). Do what you can, and don't push your body to do more. Failing to listen to my body cost me abilities I am still trying to regain. Hang in there! Prayers for your recovery - Srwalden (talk) 08:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Srwalden. I appreciate that. My fingers are crossed that I can remove that asklepian on my userpage sooner rather than later. -Thibbs (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - any luck with Hein? I am trying to get Publications of the Selden Society, Volume 77 for a new legal history article "List of Common Law Writs" and I don't think Rx would be able to send it to me because it looks like it might too long and there could probably be a copyright problem ... Seraphim System ^(talk) 02:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just saw you weren't feeling well, it's not very urgent — whenever you get a chance, I hope you feel better soon Seraphim System ^(talk) 02:03, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seraphim System, I appreciate your patience. At this point there have been no users willing to give up their access, but we issue follow-up questionnaires periodically and hopefully it won't take too long. In the meanwhile I would be happy to help provide you the text of the main list from Volume 77 since it falls within the 200 page limit from Hein. Let me know if you would be interested in that portion. -Thibbs (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thibbs: If you could email it to me when you get a chance that would be appreciated - I have a list of writs drafted, but want to flesh it out a bit more before publishing. Seraphim System ^(talk) 10:58, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is just to let you know I've gotten access to Selden from another source for the time being, so there is no longer any need to keep my application on hold, it can be closed. Seraphim System ^(talk) 17:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs,

Hope you are doing well! In the past several weeks, we did some analysis and evaluation on our tool. An exciting finding is that invitations from WikiProject organizers increased the edits of new (experienced) editors about 40% within the target project compared to new editors who didn’t receive anything!

I want to have an interview with you about your experience of using our tool. The interview will be about 30 - 45 minutes via phone, Skype or Google Hangout whichever works best for you. You will receive a $10 gift card as compensation afterwards. Please let me know if you could help. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bobo.03 I would potentially be interested, however I am working M-Th 7AM-6PM and some Fridays so it would have to be either this Friday or this weekend... Let me know what time frame you were thinking about and we can set something up when I have some free time. -Thibbs (talk) 03:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Email sent. Bobo.03 (talk) 14:35, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hellow

I see here [4] you can help to retrive somes parts of this magazine. I'm looking for the "summer 2009" issue, the TrackMania United article. I try to develop the french wikipedia page for fr:TrackMania United.

Can you give me the article with :

• number issue
• date issue
• title of the article
• page of the article
• author (if exist)

?

Regards --Archimëa (talk) 15:40, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y Sent. -Thibbs (talk) 21:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! --Archimëa (talk) 11:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the English Wikipedia recently created a new user permission for editors involved in off-wiki outreach work, event coordinator. This new permission allows users to mark accounts for confirmed for up to 10 days, and also allows them to create accounts for events without rate limits without some of the features of the account creator right that aren't used at edit-a-thons and other events. I have added the event coordinator permission to your account and removed the account creator permission, as you appear to have been using it mainly for outreach work.This should have no noticeable impact on your ability to create accounts, and will give you the extra ability to temporarily confirm accounts if you need to. For more information, you can see the information page on the right, or you can ask me if you have any questions. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 01:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hellow

I'm looking for someone who can eventually help me. When I have time or when i see good references on The Simpsons video games (old magazine articles, written at the release date of the games), I add it to the French pages...

For 2 games, a lot of pro critics review for the PC version are near impossible to find.

• The Simpsons (video game) : only a review from Dragon magazine.
• The Simpsons: Bart's House of Weirdness : so few, CGW + Dragon Magazine...

I found each game PC version is reviewed in VideoGames & Computer Entertainment issue 41 and issue 42
I found it on eBay :

• https://www.ebay.com/itm/VIDEO-GAMES-AND-COMPUTER-ENTERTAINMENT-MAGAZINE-V-4-7-1992-SIMPSONS-KRUSTY/362357503529?epid=1000104069&hash=item545e30b629:g:TygAAOSwPHxbChh8
• https://www.ebay.com/itm/VIDEO-GAMES-AND-COMPUTER-ENTERTAINMENT-MAGAZINE-V-4-6-JUNE-1992-STREET-FIGHTER/302775356034?hash=item467ed14a82:g:sSMAAOSwUl5bChUL

I'm OK for some bucks, price for each is 6$ : 6$ + 6$ is something I can pay, but shipement fews to France (where I live) are 33$ for each, so 66$+12$ = so it's impossible, it's too expensive and prevent me to buy it.

So is there a way that you (you seem to have a lots of magazines), or someone at Wikipedia in English can help me on this bid ? Pehraps to have less shippements few and then, share it for preservation ?

? Regards from France --Archimëa (talk) 12:21, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will see what I can find among my collection. In the meanwhile, have you looked through any of the sources here? Sometimes scans of magazines can be found online so I would check there first. Otherwise, I would ask at WT:VG to see if anyone can help you. It's possible that one of the other editors already owns the issue and would be able to help you obtain the info you are seeking. -Thibbs (talk) 01:49, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hellow. Yes i tried severals times to look at archive.org (if you look at the french articles, i listed every usefull weblinks existing at the time from there)

I also checked depply Retromags and Oldgamemags. I also checked the german database kulboy, but there's nothing more.

If there a way to find eventually the magazines from you or others editors, i'm obviously intersted . ;) --Archimëa (talk) 08:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archimëa Another good French place for retro magazines is here. I'll make a post at WT:VG for you tomorrow to see if there is anything out there. -Thibbs (talk) 00:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, obviously, I took a look at abandonware-mag first, I checked easily this database as i'm french... there nothing more currently, in gaming console and computer magazines.

Ok the for the post --Archimëa (talk) 08:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Might be easier to ship the magazine to a service in the US that does digitization. Would be less expensive than overseas shipping and would get it to you faster, I imagine. I saw a few threads at Retromags about using a service like "1 Dollar Scan". czar 13:48, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hellow User:czar : It's good idea at least for those who have magazines and live in america.
How could I do ?
I can do a bank to bank payment (i don't know the word), to Thibs ? then after he send it. So it is 2 times shipement fews payment. You think i can buy it and ask the seller to send directly to 1 $ scan ? i suppose there is some reference to add with the books. Complicated for a non-native english. i don't see me asking that to the seller...
How do you see this could be done ?
Thibbs ? You intersted in buy it (I PAY), and share it (then you keep the magazines) ? --Archimëa (talk) 19:44, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thibbs&Czar  : I manage to start discussing with the seller. He might do a present to reduce shipment cost... perhaps...

Thank you for listening, Hope i didn't disurb you. Regards from France. --Archimëa (talk) 13:41, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archimëa - No bother at all. I'm sorry I was unavailable to help. I'm just returning from a wedding vacation and I didn't have access to the internet. I appreciate the lengths you are going to improve the encyclopedia. I have also purchased foreign source materials and I know the shipping&handling can really add up. I hope you didn't have to extend yourself too much! -Thibbs (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, no problem at all...

Indeed it's complicated. The language difficultys + bigger coast is problematic. --Archimëa (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry we haven't spoken much for three years. I didn't get to tell you the name of the user who accused me of being the only person who objected having former programming lists from Retro Television themed channel lists articles. The user was Vjmlhds. Don't worry about me, I moved on to other TV channels though half of me still feels the pain from the experience. I doubt that user will apologize for its actions on me. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the updates, FilmandTVFan28. It sounds like it's been a nightmare! Good on you for keeping up spirits. -Thibbs (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dear Thibs, My heinonline pass does not work what should I do?Rajabi.abolghasem (talk) 14:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Rajabi.abolghasem, sorry for such a long delay. I am no longer working as the TWL contact for heinonline. There is a list of coordinators at Wikipedia:TWL/Coordinators. Someone from this list should be able to help you further. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Thibbs. Sorry to hear about your medical issues. Was planning on reviving the newsletter if you are able to. If not I understand due to your aliments. GamerPro64 05:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GamerPro64, I just wrote you an email. -Thibbs (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response. I did read your email. And I am hoping that once I get a reply from Torchiest we can really get the ball rolling. And hopefully more volunteers so that you don't be the only features writer. You being a sporadic contributor is fine by me. GamerPro64 04:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Made a thread for the relaunch to get the ball rolling. GamerPro64 03:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Phoeey - these all seem functional links. Since the tag has been ignored since 2013, maybe you should do something useful like expanding them! Johnbod (talk) 02:44, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod, the functionality of the links is not the issue. If you read WP:CITESTYLE I think you'll realize why that tag was originally placed. You can fix the citations or leave them for another editor to fix, but please do not remove the cleanup tags unless the problem has been addressed. -Thibbs (talk) 03:11, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have more useful things to do (as has everyone else it seems). If they bother you, you'd better fix them, as no one else is likely to. This isn't 2007. Or let the tag disfigure the article until the crack of doom. Johnbod (talk) 03:54, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod, we've both been here long enough to know how Wikipedia works: The tag is not intended to disfigure anything. It's intended to help identify a problem with the article so that it can be repaired (by anyone) and then the tag can be removed (by anyone). I'm not interested in arguing about this any further. I'm sorry I reverted your edit. I did not intend any offense. -Thibbs (talk) 04:45, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'm in the process of drafting a topic ban (and possible indef block) against SNAAAAKE!! for the admin noticeboard. I'll send you a message when it goes live. If you have can provide/compile any diffs or short statements regarding any issues you've had with him regarding video games or gender issues that would be a big help, but no worries if you don't have time for that. Damien Linnane (talk) 10:18, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I ended up getting enough info from around the place, so the topic ban request is now live. See here. Damien Linnane (talk) 16:04, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I've been unavailable for a few days. Niemti has such a long history here at Wikipedia that it would take ages to fully capture. My own interactions with him range from normal editorial interactions to !voting on past problems to speaking privately and at length with him in the past. I think some of Niemti's past is kind of coming out throughout the noticeboard discussion. Thanks for letting me know. -Thibbs (talk) 04:03, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks anyway. :) Damien Linnane (talk) 04:19, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bro. You granted me EBSCO access in about 2016. I emailed you in March 2019 to ask this... I wasn't sure if that got auto-renewed and converted into WP:LIBRARY or if I need to reapply. Also does it give me access to recent wsj.com and other online paywalls, like say, articles from 1998? There are way too many subscription services to know what to do! Thanks!

— Smuckola(talk) 05:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smuckola. I'm afraid I don't know the answer. I stopped working as the TWL contact for EBSCO about a year ago when my health took a turn for the bad. There is a list of coordinators at Wikipedia:TWL/Coordinators. Someone from this list should be able to help you further. Let me know if you need further assistance with EBSCO. -Thibbs (talk) 15:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry to hear about that, Thibbs. You've done a quality job for a core critical public service. It really changed a lot for me to have access to all new things. I hope you feel better, brother. — Smuckola(talk) 07:40, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ВD. Since you had some involvement with the ВD redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I responded at the discussion. -Thibbs (talk) 23:04, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[5] Returning to User talk:Thibbs/Archive 10#VG CSE, GameSpot not working properly, I think the issue worked itself out. The citations I had mentioned not finding in the VGSE at the time (including site:gamespot.com "take 2 captures tarantula") now show up just fine. I added back the missing Gamespot exclusions and tested the citations again—works fine. I'll work through the backlog now. fyi @Izno and Lordtobi: czar 19:27, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that "Take 2 Captures Tarantula" also shows up for me now. Lordtobi (✉) 19:31, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. Glad to hear things are working more reliably now. -Thibbs (talk) 02:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and as an update, things seem to have completely stalled with the idea of making the CSE into a nonprofit tool. The Wikimedia people stopped communicating in early March 2018 after admitting that they hadn't used TechSoup in a long time and they they had lost the password. The last time we spoke they were still searching for the password that would allow tool owners to grant the tool nonprofit status through Wikipedia. It's a shame because all such Wikipedia-oriented Google tools must now be commercial. If anyone wants to follow up on this with the WMF I can forward my communications which I think provides a clear set of instructions regarding how to set a tool up as a nonprofit tool. -Thibbs (talk) 13:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be curious where that correspondence ended up, if you want to forward czar 23:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Czar - Check your mail. -Thibbs (talk) 01:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thibbs, I have started a discussion over our Village pump with the aim of maintaining a public list of all editors who are granted access to any TWL resource. Your thoughts and opinions on the proposal are welcome:-) Regards, ∯WBG^converse

Thanks for the heads up. I have responded at the proposal. -Thibbs (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi Thibbs I managed to get my account back after when the Stewards have locked it back in 2011. It's been 9 years since I was locked from Wikipedia and now I got my main account back. I added all the major Bop It releases so far and last month Hasbro released a new Bop It called the Bop It Classic which is a bigger version of the Micro. Based on the YouTube videos released so far it doesn't have a Bop It button either side, only the front side: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fidt98hCvY. Also in 2015 I was introduced to these hidden programs in consumer electronics which blind people call them popups, but later on that year we found a special name for them - 'test modes'. They basically play every sound in the game and every Bop It has a test mode. Is it worth adding information about test modes to the article?--Sam 08:22, 3 August 2019 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Samlaptop85213 (talk • contribs) Hi Sam. I was a little surprised to see that you had been able to convince User:GoldenRing, User:Ajraddatz, User:Decltype, and User:Ruslik0 to unblock you over at meta. I have to thank you for requesting that User:Samlaptop85213 should be unblocked rather than continuing the previous sockpuppeting (in which you have been engaging in as recently as 2018 with the account User:Bop It Freak). Echoing Ajraddatz' sentiments at meta about "editing again under one username", I wonder if you would be willing as a good-faith gesture to provide a list of your previous sockpuppet accounts so that they can be properly blocked and so that you aren't able to continue operating numerous undisclosed alternative accounts in violation of WP:MULTIPLE. From your previous discussion it sounds like you would like to be called "Samtastic95" now. Is that correct? I have also seen "Sam8521" and "Sam" floated as names. Given your background I would recommend against getting yet another new account, but instead I would look into a custom signature (See: WP:CUSTOMSIG). I hope you will be able to be a productive member of the community and that you don't slip back into the problems that got you banned in the first place. As far as your recent edits at Bop It, I'm afraid that the new edits are not very high quality. For example you've included many links to random YouTubers, user-generated websites, and commercial websites like amazon.com, products.hasbro.com, smythstoys.com, kmart.com, etc. along with a few sources that might potentially be usable. I think the best thing to do as a preliminary matter is to review the rules on using reliable sources (WP:RS) so that you can learn how and when commercial information is allowed to be used on Wikipedia as a source. Regarding your specific question about listing all of the sound tests in the Bop It series, I would recommend against them as it appears to be textbook WP:IINFO... The article on the Bop It series is supposed to provide an overview of the topic, not to cover micro details that would more properly belong in a Wikia like Bop-it Wiki. Have you heard of Bop-it Wiki before, Sam? The Wikias are often not as strict with the sources as Wikipedia so you might like it a lot better than at Wikipedia. I am no longer going to keep the Bop It article on my watchlist because it takes up far too much time to keep it maintained when you are helping. I hope you are able to follow Wikipedia's rules about how to edit here... -Thibbs (talk) 15:59, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Hi Thibbs In response to your questions, User:Bop It Freak wasn't created by me, it was created by Bop It Freak himself. There's no need for his acconut to be blocked at this time. I have decided to stick with my main Samlaptop85213 account but in actual fact, Sam8521 was the first account here I opened up at Wikipedia before I created Samlaptop85213. But my account Sam8521 hasn't been blocked at Simple Wikipedia but I have asked some Admins at Simple Wikipedia to unblock my account there. The list of sockuppets accounts that was made in your report you did back in 2009 was there along with Thibba (talk · contribs) which was the last account that got blocked back in 2015. Yes I have heard of the Bop It Wiki. I have actually added an article last month about the new Bop It Classic. I have also added Torx to the list of spin-offs as Torx plays like Bop It. Hopefully I'll get in touch with one of the admins from Simple Wikipedia soon to discuss getting unblocked there. Ultimatley I would like my account name to be Samtastic but it looks like someone else has taken that Username but Samtastic95 is avaliable but I have to get my accounts unblocked on other Wiki's before I can move to my new username.--Sam 16:50, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Hmmm... User:Bop It Freak does look very much like your other sockpuppets. For example when we compare this edit (by Bop It Freak) with this one (by 92.8.36.211 - which is listed as one of your sockpuppets), and we notice that both of you edit on exactly the same topics with an emphasis on sound tests and noises in electronic toys then it looks quite similar. Anyway regardless of this specific name, if you could provide administrators with a list of your other sockpuppets and other accounts that are associated with your account (like User:Deanna Lacey, etc.) then I think that would be regarded as a very good-faith gesture. If you don't want to disclose anything then that's your decision. -Thibbs (talk) 18:46, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Yeah it wasn't me who wrote that on the Brain Warp article, it was defeinetly Bop It Freak who did that.--Sam 19:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC) So you've said previously. If User:Bop It Freak is the same as User:92.8.36.211 then you must live close to each other. What an interesting coincidence. -Thibbs (talk) 19:44, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Actually Bop It Freak lives in America and I live in the UK. But we speak online together on Discord/YouTube and we both like electronic games.--Sam 19:58, 3 August 2019 (UTC) It's good to know which are sockpuppets, which could be used as meatpuppets, and which are shared accounts like User:Test Mode Insiders, but I am not an administrator. The people who you would want to consider reporting your doppelganger and associated accounts to is at The Administrators' Noticeboard. Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 20:37, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] I also got some good news regarding Simple English Wikipedia, the Admins have unblocked my account there after a 9 year block. Seems like they trust me this time around.--Samtastic 11:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC) Wikipedia starts out trusting everyone. You lose your privileges when you demonstrate that you can't be trusted to control yourself to follow the rules. I hope that you can repay the trust the Admins are tentatively placing in you this time by working here according to the rules. -Thibbs (talk) 22:48, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Yeah I need to ask admins from the other Wiki's I got blocked from like the Ialian Wikipedia and the Japanese Wikipedia and once I get unblocked from those two Wiki's then I can have my username changed to Samtastic95. Thankfully some of them are English speaking.--Samtastic 06:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC) Just wanted to say that when I made the post on meta, I was not aware of policy violations going on as recent as 2018. I appreciate this information being brought to light. Regards, decltype (talk) 09:54, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Yup. No problem. It seems that most of the recent sockpuppeting may have been as a dynamic IP User... I'm not necessarily opposed to the decision, but I appreciate that there are others who will hopefully keep an eye out so that I don't have to pay further attention to Sam's favorite topics/targets. -Thibbs (talk) 16:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this edit of yours. Are you claiming that these symbols were not standardly used at all, or just that they have been deprecated and are no longer to be used? I see them used often (and our underlying articles on electronegativity and heat capacity have numerous cited refs that use them), so I assume it's just deprecated. Do you have a ref for that? DMacks (talk) 05:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No no, I agree that both C and χ are in common usage in general. The reason I removed them here is primarily because of their position in the article. As you can see from the link they were both listed in a "Notes" section along with Z (the atomic number). The common function of a legend like that is to label/explain the columns in the existing table. Because we removed the columns for electronegativity and heat capacity a few months ago (following this discussion), it seems appropriate to remove the associated explanation from the notes/legend. There is no reason to explain the meaning of symbols that do not appear in the table. The information is factually accurate but it lacks context in this case. -Thibbs (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhhhhhh right, forgot about the table change. Sorry! Carry on. DMacks (talk) 03:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. :) -Thibbs (talk) 10:31, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you be able to send me a scan of Games magazine no. 226 (December 2007)? In particular I'm looking for content about Twilight Struggle. Kim Post (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -Thibbs (talk) 13:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mike Diver. Since you had some involvement with the Mike Diver redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:04, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I'll respond there. -Thibbs (talk) 00:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thibbs

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Atsme and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Red, White and Zero, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red, White and Zero.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Atsme}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I'll respond there. -Thibbs (talk) 00:45, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]