Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:50, 17 June 2012

This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days

Help

I need some help. I need a neutral 3rd part to resolve an editing issue here with Hullaballoo Wolfowitz here --> Jessicka

"Art Slant, Juxtapoz, Coagula Art Journal, & Hi- Fructose are all reputable 3rd party Art sources. Saying these articles are written by friends is purely speculation on your part. Jessicka's wiki page clearly states that she's an artist. Listing past art shows with 3rd party references is just like listing the albums she's released as a musician in her discography. Both are wiki relevant & significant"

Do you think you could point me in the right direction? I just need a 3rd party to have a look.

Thanks! (Lifespan9 (talk))

Edit war?

Why did you protect the article until December(?) 2012? There's no edit war at all. Irvi made a move without a rationale, WhiteWriter reverted him without a rationale too and then I checked both claims and added the results on the talkpage for each use and made the appropriate edits. You may not be familiar with the geography of the region but the related articles White Drin and Drin have that spelling because of common use. I'm not trying to get you involved in discussion, but a protection that'll last about half a year about such a non-issue is rather uncommon.--— ZjarriRrethues —  20:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

You move-warred, and have now been formally warned on your talkpage as per WP:ARBMAC. Don't even dream of using WP:GHITS as a reason (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I don't understand what you mean "WhiteWriter reverted him without a rationale" ... the rationale was clear in the move: no consensus to do so. Read WP:BRD. Memorize it. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

GHITS? ...these are google books/scholar results not raw google ones.--— ZjarriRrethues —  21:08, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Bwilkins, I'm afraid you may have gotten the wrong end of the stick here. This article had been at the "Drin" title since 2005, without any objections. If anything was disruptive, it was the undiscussed and unexplained move to "Drim" on 25 April 2012, by Antidiskriminator (talk · contribs). Of the three following moves to and fro, by three different editors, Zjarri's move back to the original location was the only one that was accompanied by relevant arguments on the talk page, so I'm really at a loss to understand why he, alone among the four users, now gets an Arbmac warning. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, as there appears to have been no complaints (as per BRD) after the April move, that was stable for all this time. Move-warring today was therefore the violation. Perhaps all of today's movers should have the ARBMAC warning - feel free to do so. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

One month of inaction after an undiscussed bold move, on a minor out-of-the-way article that basically hadn't drawn any other edit for more than a month before that move and didn't draw any for more than a month after it, is hardly evidence of "stability" constituting consensus. The move back today was the first sign of any attention to the article at all following that first move, and as such a legitimate "R" part of BRD. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't see >1 month as meeting R. That said, move-warring occurred today; period. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

There is no time limit to how "fast" BRD works. If nobody notices an edit in three years, then the next step in the discussion process will be in three years. By the way, I must also correct you on a point you made above, where you seem to imply that citing Google hits as an argument about a move is illegitimate. Google hits are explicitly recognized as one of the standard criteria in naming discussions at WP:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Multiple local names, and Zjarri's use of them is fully in line with common practice. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Fine on both - although, the second is useful in move discussions but not unilaterally especially on restricted articles such as this one. As noted at ANI, I have provided one very valid ARBMAC warning. Probably 2 more due, but as I said, I won't be the one giving them at this point. I also won't remove move protection from the article until it's worked out where the name really belongs. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Dude, you keep protecting the WP:WRONG version - especially in WP:ARBMAC situations. Don't you know, there'd be peace in the region if you had protected the right version? Toddst1 (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm such a warmonger :-( (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

If fine on both then would you please tell me why I did get a logged warning? I'm not even related to the cases you've been dealing with and ARBMAC warnings are supposed to serve as tools against disruption. --— ZjarriRrethues —  22:28, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

You read the whole thing I said, not just cherry-picking your favourite parts, right? Hey, guess what - edit-warring is disruptive. Turns out you've already been warned about ARBMAC ... which means discretionary sanctions against such disruption again. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd just like to add that User:Irvi Hyka has of late made several unilateral, highly POV page moves without any discussion and oftentimes absurd rationales in the edit-summaries: , and especially . This is really starting to become a problem. Athenean (talk) 21:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's being dealt with in ANI. How else do you think I found the additional moves today? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I just want to tell you that Zjarri was already warned officially regarding ARBMAC, back in 2010. You doubled the log today... All best. --WhiteWriter 22:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. As such, I have started a discussion on ANI in order to obtain some rough consensus for new discretionary sanctions against them (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The interesting thing about nomenclature debates is that they're all trivial. Nomenclature is all arbitrary anyway; there's no actual truth or factual basis in any issue. DS (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, someone has to eventually paint the bike shed. I have no experience in "move wars" but I am noticing from the discussion that the original mover now supports Black Drin. Therefore, I think that in this case "Black Drin" (the name it had since 2005) might be the "right wrong version" pending closure but that's just my opinion. I may be wrong. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I have moved it to the right wrong version, as suggested - adding the alternate wording in the opening sentence. At this point, Zjarri has been firmly reminded of his previous ARBMAC warning (with apparently no repercussions for their poorly-timed re-move). It is quite possible that the other 2 parties involved in yesterday's move war have not been - and it's my recommendation that they should be. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:25, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Haci ibrahim nehramli

I think you intended to delete Ibrahimov Ibrahim (Haci Ibrahim Nehramli) when you closed the AfD, instead you only got the redirect. I've tagged it for deletion under G6, but wanted to leave you a note in case I was mistaken or you otherwise wanted to take a look at it. Monty₈₄₅ 16:38, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)  Done --Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Alton, Bordon and Tadley area (2nd nomination)

This wasn't a content fork as List of bus routes in Hampshire was created as a list of lists, instead of the usual format. Peter E. James (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Admin reaction nedded

I saw in White Drin article that you are neutral admin, and familiar with ARBMAC. Therefor i am asking for your fine comment. For any possible question or solution, i am here. --WhiteWriter 21:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Draft of New Article to Replace Deleted Article: Three.js

Hello Bwilkins

On 28 April 2012 the article for Three.js was deleted. See Articles_for_deletion/Three.js

A draft of a new article is being prepared and is viewable at one of my user pages: User:TheoA/Threejs

My strong personal interest in the proceedings is declared here: User_talk:TheoA/Threejs

Would kindly have a look at the draft article and indicate as to whether you feel the article provides sufficient and valid evidence attesting to the notability of Three.js? Also, any comments as to whether a neutral point of view is maintained will be appreciated.

Thank you,

TheoA (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure how it's at all notable ... or what you're even asking for (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I was requesting your opinion as to the notability of the topic - which you have now kindly provided. Thank you. TheoA (talk) 22:16, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello again Bwilkins

Do you know about Warnock's_dilemma? I am a bit lost as to what do do. Should I wait some more to see if you reply? Should I offer the the page to WP:Articles for creation? Should I ask the opinion of he person who recommended deletion? Is the article not sufficiently NPV? Please do point me in the right direction...

TheoA (talk) 21:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Again, not notable IMHO (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

WhiteWriter

User:WhiteWriter, who was involved in the Black Drin dispute moved the Kosovo-Serbia border clashes without any consensus(he somehow claims that this section started by him, represents a consensus, although it's neither a proper and official move discussion nor does a 4-day limited discussion, which basically only the most involved editors that supported the previous move noticed, represent a consensus) to North Kosovo crisis. No consensus was reached about the same move proposal about half a year ago when WhiteWriter first proposed to move the article. User:Majuru per WP:BRD moved it to the original title and asked from WW to start a move discussion, while WhiteWriter reverted him and claimed that Majuru was acting as WP:IDONTLIKEIT Of course WhiteWriter has been blocked about disruptions on Kosovo topics and talkpage abuse regarding them. On ARBMAC the latest log related to him is from 2011 when he was involved in any edit war with another user (Vujacicm (talk · contribs) issued ARBMAC warning and edit war warning for a slow-motion edit war with already-sanctioned WhiteWriter (talk · contribs) on Duklja. WhiteWriter also warned about edit warring. Toddst1 (talk) 01:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)). (Majuru has an ARBMAC log in 2011 too) Apparently there is a need for article protections/warnings/sanctions.--— ZjarriRrethues —  18:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

After the edit-war finally a move discussion was started.--— ZjarriRrethues —  18:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Zjarri, it is below your numerous years on wiki to sue me each time you disagree over something. We had 3 users agreeing on subject, with only you disagreeing, and that is (not the best one. but still) consensus. We will see what will new RM do, but previous one was 8/4 for move. Therefore, even that was consensus for move. Also, next time talk to me first over dispute with me, and not to mamadmins.. I could also do that in opposite direction, but that will not help. And, omg, block log. Well, you know, Bwil, Zjarri was possible sock of User:Sarandioti, major DE sockmaster. But Zjarri, that is behind us. We should try to cooperate, and not just to run to report, when that is NOT last resort. P.S. Bwilkins, sure that "report" by Zjarri was fabricated, as before... Read with care, or join request, and state your opinion, as editor first. That may be the best! --WhiteWriter 18:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Since when is 8-4 ever considered to be "consensus to move"? This is not a vote. We don't; go by simple majority. We go by strength of policy-based arguments. 8-4 was apparently rightly closed as "no consensus to move" and it therefor cannot be moved (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The discussion was closed as no clear consensus for move so I fail to see how that could be interpreted as therefore that was consensus for move and I don't know how reports (?) can be fabricated. That being said it was appropriate to inform (even though I have just used the talkpage and haven't made any edits at all) an admin involved in previous such processes especially since an edit-war began based neither on sources nor on consensus (3 including you and someone who was deeply involved in the previous move proposal) and since that's done I'd suggest that we both don't use his talkpage anymore . Now that there's a move discussion it's also appropriate to post anything related to the subject there.--— ZjarriRrethues —  19:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Black Drin

Hi Bwilkins, would you mind unprotecting Black Drin again? There is now consensus for the (old and current) "Drin" version among three of the four editors involved in the moves, and the fourth has not chosen to participate in the discussion on talk. Another uninvolved editor has closed the move discussion, and I don't see any immediate danger of new edit- or move wars at this point. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

re: Speedy deletion of User talk:Plgpllc

The main intention of the tag was to alert an admin that this user was continuing to spam their user talk page after being blocked for spamming. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

First, please don't copy/paste the notice over here. If you need to alert an admin to do something, that's what ANI is for - mistagging things for CSD is unwise (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

For you

	Cake!
	Thanks for your work at DRV. Here's the cake you were promised at AN. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:14, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Yum! Excellent, and thank you! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

FWIW

I might have phrased this differently. I understand frustration can make us all a bit rude sometimes, I'm mentoring YRC on it after all. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Teach him not to rush process then. Step #1. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

He has actually made a great deal of progress and has been very hard working on this. More so that I thought he would have. He isn't done, but he is taking it very seriously. I had just bragged about this on his mentoring page, literally one minute before he went to ANI. I disagree with him on bringing it there, but I also disagreed with you on some points as well, so it all comes out in the wash I suppose. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I wasn't even responding them ...funny enough. Misplaced Pages will be here tomorrow, and next week. It will be here long past this RFC on pending changes - and it will be here past the next RFC on pending changes, and the next one after that. There's no time limit. AFD's sometimes take 8 days ...or 10...or 14. Nobody should lose sleep over an RFC. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree on that point. We manage to mess up the process when we don't rush it often enough that rushing it isn't the answer. But as a favor, give him a chance when you can. A look at his diffs might surprise you, as he is obviously sincere in his efforts. For the most part, it is night and day compared to just a month ago. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm concerned then that he can show bizarre tendencies so quickly, and so easily. Maybe a topic ban from any admin noticeboard would help his progress? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:16, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think any action is needed or warranted. I don't have a real issue with him bringing it there, even if I disagree with him on the necessity of it. But today isn't his day. Most of his work is quite good when he is focused, he just hasn't got it as a habit yet. Most of the time lately at BLPN and on talk pages, he has been more civil than you. Should I consider an AN ban for you as well? ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Show me some actual (not impossibly perceived) incivility of mine, and I'll ban myself :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Midcent

Hi just wanted to let you know that I dont think you locking the talkpage of User:Midcent was necessary. It's a little too much in my opinion. I really dont care if he signs or not. But that's just my opinion. Caden 14:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, here I always thought you were in favour of following policy :-)

It was locked to avoid further pile-on, and because the ONLY purpose of a talkpage while blocked is to request unblock - which he was not doing. Therefore, it needed to be locked from both editors and the user. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:02, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

To be honest I wasnt aware until today that signatures was policy, I thought it was just a guideline. I also didnt think about avoiding further pile on to the page so I must admit based on that you did the right thing. Just forgive I'm blond :) Caden 15:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, I noticed the blondness on your userpage LOL (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:35, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Inappropriate FPP. Please undo or link to policy justifying arbitrary action. See also .Nobody Ent 22:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

List of modern dictators

Hello. I saw you blocked List of modern dictators form being edited and i thank you. I was trying to stop edit warring from several users warning them on their talk pages. I see this list is quite problematic and i think we should make some kind of RfC to see if we really need the list, how it may be compiled and the overall thought of the Wikipedians about the accuracy and importance of this list. I've requested all users involved to provide if they support or not the RfC idea. --Hahc21 03:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I have no interest in the article content at all - my involvement is purely administrative (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Justicejayant's ban

You blocked his account but he is still manipulating the pages as an ip, User:122.169.12.69 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:List_of_modern_dictators&action=history

This proves this was one of his ip's, and he publicly admitted to it top, in case you had forgotten. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:List_of_modern_dictators&diff=496415802&oldid=496415378

Please block his ip. I7laseral (talk) 04:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You had the IP wrong :-) Temporarily blocked the right one (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, this is amazing mate. You blocked me from not only editing wikipedia articles but also blocked me from editing my user talk page. This is Arsenalkid700 (talk · contribs). In fact I only heard of the 3 revert rule a few days ago only because I have never gotten blocked before and now I have. Now I have also looked at the ruling and it says that the block should be for 24 hours and not the 48 given to me. If you dont unblock me, fine but at least lower the amount of hours. I have been a member on wikipedia for a long time and if you have the time to look at my past work (on the account you blocked; just look through the user page for my work) and you will see that I have made a huge impact on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Football for well over a year. I understand my wrong doing and next time I shall inform someone else to handle the situation. And yes I admit my opener of "I know I am right" is not the best way to start but what would you do if you only had little time to edit and then all of a sudden you see that your blocked and that by the time the block is finished you have no time to edit because of what is happening in the real world. Now if possible (and this would help me as well) is there anyway I can be unblocked now for a small period of time and then starting at midnight (UTC) I am blocked once again for the duration of time left. It would allow me to finish my projects (or most of them) and maybe keep me off wikipedia while I work on things in the real world. Please take these into consideration. Thank you. --FootballinIndiaWiki (talk) 15:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

And now your block-evading account is indefinitely blocked WP:EVADE. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

And, "mate", if you noticed, your block was put at 48 hours to exactly match that of the other person involved in the edit-war, which is both fair and recommended. We sure wouldn't want you to be able to return to the article before they are. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Just to let you know that this editor is continuing his edit war here: Manuel Gomes (football coach). The war seems to be going on between this editor and the subject of the article. Aside from the clear COI issues here, the comments in the edit summaries show that they are doing this only to irritate each other. Despite his earlier denials, Arsenalkid700 (talk · contribs) is clearly aware of the 3RR rule and doesn't care. The other editor seems to persist solely to promote himself in the article, continually adding back a large amount of unreferenced, weasle-word ridden and in several places contradictory information. I have edited this page myself twice to strip it back to only referenced BLP information and then to revert a revert. I don't really want to get any more involved in this, but Arsenalkid700 (talk · contribs) seems now to be turning into more of a troll than a worthwhile editor and Mgomes neca (talk · contribs) seems to use Misplaced Pages solely to promote himself. Do you think more action is necessary? Fenix down (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Jack Sebastian

Thanks for your even-handed look at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Schrodinger's cat is alive reported by User:Jack Sebastian (Result: stale). The conversation on the talk page continue in an even worse vein, with Jack Sebastian (talk · contribs) insulting not just me (See here), but another editor too (See here). I am concerned about his approach with other editors who disagree with him—and it that I am not the only one to think this too. After starting the 3RR process against me, he admits to "getting an overview of your editing style and trying to figure you out" This is verging on WP:HOUND, especially as he has now involved himself in and RFN issue, reverting my edits on the FL List of James Bond novels and stories. A search of the ANI noticeboards shows me I'm right to be concerned to some extent: his name appears with some frequency, and it is seldom in a good light.

I appreciate that my own edits in the James Bond (character) matter are hardly a glowing endorsement of my editing, but he does have a way of aggressively twisting the truth round on certain matters and fired off responses much too quickly. Having said all that, is there any way to ensure that he does not cross a HOUND-line? Thanks - SchroCat (^ • @) 15:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again, but despite being asked not to insult editors, he's firing insults out again: could you please advise a course of action? If you don't want to involve yourself then I entirely understand, but any indication of where I could to just to ensure that he is just civil in his approach, would be appreciated Thanks so much. - SchroCat (^ • @) 20:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in. I'm hoping that is the last word on this particular matter and that the other one does not get out of hand either. Your efforts are much appreciated. - SchroCat (^ • @) 07:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Star Drive (4x Game)

StarDrive should also have been deleted. --Izno (talk) 15:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Declined unblock request at User talk:Blobmonster21

You may just possibly be interested in seeing this edit, since it refers to a comment you made. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

One more thought: I have never done a survey to find out, but I think of the times when I say "I am willing to consider unblocking if you do XYZ", in the vast majority of cases the user does not do XYZ, and is never unblocked. I see no harm in giving a user a chance to show that they are genuinely willing to change, even though I know they probably won't take up the chance. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:27, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I do agree - for me, it's often based on the previous level of issues, and the sincerity/honesty surrounding their unblock request (and the talkpage history). (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

user:TreasuryTag

Hi. Why did you revert my community message on this banned user's talk page? 94.4.117.83 (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Because he is not banned from making future unban request; that was pure vandalism (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Right, so arbcom have come back with a final decision on whether he should stay or not, and you reckon if he tries to cause more drama by slagging people off, and going on about how unfair the situation is and playing the victim as usual, then we should just allow it, and go through the whole time-wasting motions of discussing it with him? I'm sorry but I was not vandalising that talk page - to be honest an admin really ought to revoke talk page access. If he wants to complain he can email someone in private rather than letting the world know and getting random observers sucked in so the whole messy situation can explode again. Then againb maybe I'm wrong, maybe it was just vandalism *sigh* 94.4.117.83 (talk) 23:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You're very wrong. He has his ability to appeal. The timeline for such has been set by ArbComm. To claim otherwise is vandalism. Grave-dancing doesn't become you, or anyone. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You really think allowing an appeal will benefit wikipedia somehow?!? 00:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.4.117.83 (talk)

Whether I do or not, that's not my call nor is it yours to make (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

How do you explain comments like this ? 94.4.117.83 (talk) 17:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The defensive part of me says "I don't have to explain it to you."

The pragmatic part of me says "It's probably the most self-explanatory comment ever to appear on that page"

The WP:AGF part of says "what exactly do you need to have explained to you?"

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The talk page lurker part of me says asking for an explanation for that edit is nothing short of trolling by an obvious ipsock. Toddst1 (talk) 18:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It would be wrong of me to delete the above comment by Toddst1, but I will ask you to ignore it as it is complete and utter garbage. Anyway, back to the original point. In that edit I've quoted, you appear to be actively campaigning for TT to be allowed to appeal as much as he likes, yet you state "it is not my call to make". That is what I was asking you to explain. This is all just resulting in unnecessary drama. 94.4.117.83 (talk) 18:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Yes, it would be wrong. --Chip123456 (talk) 18:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

My statment clearly says that TT should be allowed to submit any future unban requests exactly as permitted by relevant policy/body, no more and no less. For example, if BASC says 6 months, then so be it. As such, it is not your or my call to make to say "no more appeals ever" (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

heymister14

Thanks for the note, but my replies have been at heymister's talk page, so I've copied your response over there without the TPS template. Feel free to add it back (or any other modifications, of course) if you prefer that it be left unmodified. Nyttend (talk) 11:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Call My Name (Cheryl Cole song)

Hello! Is there anyways to unprotected Call My Name (Cheryl Cole song) so the article can be created? I've created the article here but someone redirected it to that protected article. The song has already charted and has enough amount of content to be created, everything is sourced. Thanks. :) - Saulo 17:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Saulo, I redirected it because it shouldn't be labelled "Cheryl song" at all. She's labelled as "Cheryl" on artwork, but still going by "Cheryl Cole". And sorry BWilkins, I didn't realize someone had posted this on your wall. _{MusicFreak7676} 21:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Knowz

FYI, I accepted this unblock request; the user was neither warned about edit warring nor notified about the edit warring complaint. --jpgordon 17:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I saw that ... not sure I accept the "I wasn't warned about a rule I already know about" defence, especially when this was a 3-way block to all of the involved edit-warriors. Ethically, you'd have to unblock the other 2 now, which would be bad (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, one of the other two made the complaint, and the other was informed, so neither has a procedural or ethical leg to stand on in that regard. --jpgordon 18:04, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Azure move

I just saw this in my watchlist:

(Move log); 21:16 . . Bwilkins (talk | contribs) moved page Azure Services Platform to Windows Azure ‎(this would be the proper title, see my talk page)

Which talk page discussion are you referring to? Thanks - Pointillist (talk) 21:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

check the talkpage for whoever tagged it for the move...this involved a deletion/move. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:24, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

That's me. The whole thing collectively is called Windows Azure - it's not just the OS itself; in fact I believe the servers actually run Windows Server 2008 (R2)/2012 in reality.--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks all - Pointillist (talk) 23:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Death of a Wikipedian (at your hands, sadly)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

So, you blocked me for edit-warring a few months back. I haven't really felt like editing since then. You'll likely not remember the incident (though it's still on my talk page if you care), but that's not so important. What is important is that you seemingly-valued punishment of a Misplaced Pages editor over providing guidance. The ONE time I've ever had to interact with an admin after years of edits, yay, I was blocked. (Even self-reporting in an attempt to determine if I really violated WP:BLP or not; instead, you gave a snide reply with your ban.)

So, here's to you, for killing off a "good" editor (in my opinion; feel free to look at my other edits.) I'm not angry at Misplaced Pages; I'm just annoyed that *you* seem to value punishment over guidance and constructive assistance, especially when asked for!

I don't portend to change your mind on these types of decisions, but simply hope to inform you that punishment with no real explanation or discussion is not helpful, especially when said user seeks out guidance as to whether a 4th edit violates the rules or not (I broke 3RR for possible WP:BLP issues, and assumed you might give me guidance on that...) Instead, you'd rather ban me for 24 hours. Right when I was engaging in a talk page discussion to try to sort out the issue you banned me for. (Even better there, ban a user who's obviously taken an issue to a talk page to try to sort it out.)

Unfortunately, your 24-hour ban turned into me not editing for months. I hope you'll consider your actions as far as punishment vs reasonable dialogue go in the future (and you can do BOTH at the same time, imagine that!)

We're obviously losing Misplaced Pages editors. You personally caused one (me) to be lost. Please keep that in mind. I may go back to editing more in the future, but I don't expect that I'll start editing as much as I have in the past...unless I know that Misplaced Pages promotes a culture of helpfulness over a culture of punishment. You've only shown me the latter, unfortunately.

In short, "good job" on banning me on a technicality, when I personally sought out guidance on the issue but was instead summarily handed down a 24-hour ban, which turned into a personal permanent ban since I don't care for such bans from an admin who would not properly discuss the reasoning behind such ban.

We need good editors on Misplaced Pages. Your actions have driven off at least one good editor: me! So, please consider the repercussions of your fine-grained "3RR violated, must ban" actions and the like, if you hope to not continue to lose editors.

Again, I have nothing against you personally. I just don't feel like editing if the culture is "punish people if they break the rules a little bit!" rather than "hmm, enforce rules but try to help editors who break them, even if a temporary ban is warranted, to not break said rules in the future." I hope you understand the difference; if you do not, you quite honestly should not be a Misplaced Pages admin.

– 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 02:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Awww... it isn't that bad. After all IPv6 is enabled now, and you're probably the most famous pseudonym account resembling an IPv6 range. Nevertheless, though, when I was blocked (indefinitely!) I did not call it quits on Misplaced Pages. My block appeal led to an unblock within under one or two hours of the block.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Jasper, especially for amusing me by recognizing my IPv6 doc prefix pseudonym. :) I don't WANT to call it quits on Misplaced Pages; I just wish that admins would err towards the side of helpfulness rather than towards punishment of users! I intend to contribute more; sadly, I've been put off by this admin's personal decision. I'm just trying to inform him/her of the consequences of such abrupt bans, rather than being helpful towards the user(s) in question... :) – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 03:13, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I almost wanted to do the same things myself when I got blocked myself. I do see you have been bitten, and so was I. The current system of blocking for edit warring is not perfect at all and Bwilkins just had to carry out this current, albeit nevertheless flawed, system. I feel sorry if it seems Bwilkins has been mean to you - I thought the admin who blocked me was mean to me at the very first instant but remembered that he was just one of us.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I just went back through the whole thing. Where's the "punishment" - I don't do punishment. You and another editor both edit-warred, and both got an extremely short WP:BLOCK (not a WP:BAN, by the way - you're right, if you were banned after one incident like that, you should be pissed off). The block itself was upheld by yet another admin. A 1-day protection for the project is common: it's a "warning shot across the bow", and most intelligent people learn from it and move on to become good editors. Indeed, many people have argued that their first block was what made them stronger, better editors because they realized that even the most simple of rules was going to be enforced, which meant that even their edits to the project were going to be protected by someone, somewhere. Was it bitey? Um, no.

There's no humanly-possible way to blame the admin: I did not hold your mouse in my hands and edit-war on your behalf. I did not force you to ignore the warnings. I did not cause you to break the policies and rules that you agreed to when you created your account. To blame any admin for a single block due to your own behaviour would be bizarre to say the least. You broke a community norm; you were told to stop; you didn't. What else did you expect would happen? Blaming me for you not editing would be like saying "I hate cars because my dad once yelled at me for scratching his vintage Mustang Convertible with a rock".

The number of blocks that I have handed out is paltry. I think last month it sadly hit the 400 mark (the highest admin has 14,000+). Most of those are spammers. The second most are edit-warriors. Blocking is not my usual goal. My personal philosophy is at the very top of my userpage, and I stick by it every day.

We humans are separated from most of the animal kingdom due to our ability to analyse and adapt, rather than simply react. I encourage you to look at the bigger picture, analyse your actions within it, and adapt - don't get stuck in what was your reaction at the time. Do you have the potential to add to the project? Do you now recognize that your edits will also be afforded a certain level of protection from other edit-warriors in the future?

Finally, although you think you're attempting to be funny or dramatic with your metaphor of "Death" at "my hands", it's neither appropriate nor correct; indeed, it's a pretty disgusting accusation of murder even as a metaphor. If that's your sense of humour or drama, then you might not be the type of editor Misplaced Pages is looking for anyway. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:43, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I was going to say that I appreciate that you did actually go back through the incident...but you say "I did not force you to ignore the warnings." What warnings? There were no warnings to ignore. I was told to stop? When? By whom? If I was warned, I certainly would have heeded that warning. (Unless by warning you mean "read the rules and interpret whether or not WP:BLP applies on your own.") If you actually went back through the incident, you'd certainly have seen that no warnings were involved. Please don't claim to have done something you haven't done.

And of course I'm blaming you personally; your actions caused me to be less-inclined to edit Misplaced Pages. Whether or not those actions were correct is something we disagree on, but the result is the same. You say that we have " ability to analyse and adapt." I would say you had a faulty analysis as to how to solve this issue, both in the application of punishment and the lack of analysis of the potential benefits versus negative consequences of said punishment. (And the lack of accepting that analysis even now after we have actual data.)

You fail to address the "seek out guidance" part of my message. THAT is the reason I stopped editing; not because of the ban itself. If your ban message had said "no, this isn't covered under WP:BLP because <reason>" or even just "I appreciate that you've stopped edit-warring and reported the issue, but I need to apply punishment equitably to be fair" or something else along those lines, e.g. giving me GUIDANCE instead of just PUNISHMENT. That is the difference between a useful penalty and a penalty that just...penalizes, to negative effect. You cannot disagree that your penalty had a negative unintended effect, even if you disagree over its appropriateness.

And seriously? A "disgusting accusation of murder?" I suggest you don't watch any movies or read any books that have "Murder" in the title. Some of them use the word humorously, some ironically, some metaphorically (and some all three!) Some contain actual death, some do not. You probably shouldn't watch TV, play video games, or use the Internet either. You end your message saying that I "might not be not the type of editor Misplaced Pages is looking for anyway" because of *my personal sense of humor*!? (Which I'd certainly not apply to any article, unless it was an article requiring an example of that type of humor...) Think that over for a minute. Discriminate, much? Judge, much? Are there other classes or types of thought or other personal attributes that you think editors should not possess?

Anyways, despite all this, I'm still going to WP:AGF and not blame Misplaced Pages for your erroneous judgment. You are still learning, as are all of us, and you can still err, as you did here. Perhaps I erred as well, but I can't know that as you failed to provide guidance, as noted. I suppose it is unfair to Misplaced Pages to blame the entire entity for the actions of one person; though it's unfortunate that that person makes false statements about non-existent warnings and judges people based on their sense of humor, yet holds a position of power within the larger entity. I do hope you've learned from this incident. All I've learned is that I should be extremely careful about strict numerical guidelines, and should not attempt to make an edit based on other overriding rules that may or may not apply. (And I've learned that some admins don't want editors with certain personal views that are irrelevant to their editing of actual Misplaced Pages articles.) – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 16:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

2001:db8, I do have to agree that Bwilkins' block was justified. Both of you should just drop the WP:STICK on this, because this argument is not going to work out and you're not going to change the past.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I didn't intend to change any minds, simply to point out my view; I primarily replied since I thought it repulsive that an admin would consider someone jokingly using a common metaphor on a user talk page to be someone who shouldn't be editing Misplaced Pages. If Bwilkins doesn't like the metaphor, that's perfectly fine, but suggesting that I *shouldn't edit Misplaced Pages at all* because Bwilkins doesn't like the metaphor is ridiculous. Anyways, I'm not going to spam Bwilkins' talk page any more, so I'll leave it at that. – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 17:28, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Message from IP

Hello again, Sorry to use this page but I don't seem to be able to get into your talk page. You sent me an email so you must have put something on my or your talk page. But I've had enough Wiki for a while. I'm doing some research on Tottenham Hotspur for the club's entry, through two of the club's fanzines. I'll log into Wiki again then. Cheers. You can always ring me - (Redacted) (I don't mind giving number out as I said to somebody called Tow).82.11.178.239 (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC) Herbolzheim (Lloyd actually)

Remember that you may not edit Misplaced Pages both logged in and logged out. You can always get to my talkpage by clicking "TALK" on my signature (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Heh

I'd edited the AN3 page and was about to block for a week ... to find you already had... Black Kite (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Great minds think alike. However, according to discussions above, I live to block people ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:32, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Editor review comment

Hi Bwilkins

I have just come across this comment on Thine Antique Pen's editor review, which I've removed as unfair and disruptive. First and foremost, Editor review is a place for constructive criticism, and there was nothing constructive about your comment whatsoever. Secondly, I believe a large portion of it was demonstrably false.

• Thine Antique Pen came to me for adoption on 20th April (which I didn't accept because I was busy), since then I've followed his progress. I've seen him come on leaps and bounds, under the guidance of a number of great editors, Dr. Blofeld, Anna Frodesiak, Demiurge1000 and ItsZippy jump to mind immediately. He's taken feedback on board and learnt from it.
• Creating stubs is an important role on this encyclopedia. Yes, it's not the most important. It's not the most glamourous, or admirable, but it has it's part to play. There are many roles on the encyclopedia, and article writing is only one of them - even if it is perhaps the most admirable, the most useful. Just because he does not write articles doesn't mean he doesn't have a place in the community. Would you like me to list different people who have excelled in areas that don't include article writing? I'm sure I can.
• Is he doing a good job of stub writing? Well, he's written something like a 1000 stubs, and I don't see his talk page littered with complaints or deletion notices. Either he's doing a good job, or the patrollers are doing a bad one. Not to mention the fact that he's written 3 or 4 good articles! I can't remember the last GA I wrote, but it was a while ago. When was yours?
• Requesting rights is not necessarily hunger for power. I read it as a misinterpretation of how the encyclopedia works - thinking that the tools lead to the work, rather than the work leading to the tools. Since he had this explained to him, he has not requested a tool (I believe, globally) - despite multiple uninvolved editors suggesting he get autopatrolled. It's a right that is appropriate for what he's doing, but he didn't request it, someone else did. That he agreed it was appropriate is not wrong.

Finally, your other comments were direct attacks on his character and unbecoming of you as an admin, indeed as a person. Had you forgotten that there's a person behind the keyboard you were referring to? I expected better from you. As I said, I've removed your comments. If you want to replace them with an actual constructive review of TAP, where you demonstrate his problems and you give him suggestions on how to improve, I'm sure he would appreciate that. Worm(talk) 08:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

• 3 GAs, 7 DYKs and about 2100 stubs. ⇒TAP 08:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd request that you return it. Based on his numerous appearances at AN, ANI, whinging about his inability to apply for more permissions (all well-proven), the comment was 100% valid, and stands quite obviously on its own. The suggestions on improvement are to do exactly the opposite of what he's now infamous for, which is being a royal pain in the ass. If he wants to focus on writing, and STOP whinging left right and centre, then he'll be a better person/editor. Every 19th edit or so (unofficial estimate), the whinging recurs, and it's not becoming of anyone. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

No. It was at best unfair and uncivil, at worst a personal attack. If you must return it unaltered, do so, but I would be requesting more eyes on the situation. If you'd rather request eyes on the situation, feel free to take it to any forum, I'll be happy to join you there.Worm(talk) 11:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

It was 100% supported by freely available evidence, and doesn't even push the boundaries of NPA, nor uncivil. WP:SPADE. I expect you to return it (and if for some reason, you feel it necessary to include my clarifying statements above then feel free to do so). You and I BOTH know the review was 100% accurate and supported. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

(Random comment) I would be interested to know how he "totally lacks a CLUE", and "fails to takes any advice" is either 100% accurate or 100% supported.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 11:26, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

If you can show me ANY 7-day period where he has NOT at some point made a statement about "not being permitted to request additional permissions", then I'll be fully happy to retract that :-) That's something he's been told to stop doing over and over and over again, and it's fantastic advice (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I must note that the "not permitted —" is when editors have actually asked me why I don't have certain things. ⇒TAP 11:43, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Come on TAP, show me a 7 day period where you haven't said it. Do it please. Tell me you'll never say it again - when you say it, even in the context you provide above, it's still coming across as whinging - almost like you're hoping someone will step in on your behalf (like what you ALREADY did with the one permission you have) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Since TAP has been criticised by the blocking administrator for not mentioning the restrictions on his requesting additional permissions when the subject comes up, I think this demand is completely ridiculous.

BWilkins, you seem to have some sort of issue with TAP; it's obvious that you find him very annoying, and the interactions between the two of you do neither of you any good at all. I have a suggestion. Take everything TAP-related off your watchlist. When TAP-related things crop up elsewhere, ignore them. Resist the urge to comment. Forget about him completely. This is likely to be much more productive for everyone concerned, and indeed for the project. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Ooooh, such brillance. In order to remove him from my watchlist I'd actually have to have him on my watchlist, wouldn't I. Instead, he just keeps showing up where I already am making the same whining comments, and being chastised for the same damn things by others. Like I said below and elsewhere (long before your sarcasm and literally unhelpful commentary), I want this guy to succeed. I'm fully within my rights and responsibilities to point out his shortcomings, and what HAS in the recent past been an annoyance to the entire project. By pointing out just how fucking annoying he has been it gives him the chance to learn, so as not be so fucking annoying to the project in the future, and to be a great editor. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

The last 7 days, actually. As far as I can find (having checked all talk namespace edits in the last 7 days), he has made no reference in the last week.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 11:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you find anywhere in the last 7 days where TAP has commented on his topic ban on requesting user-rights, and if not, can you retract your statement, as you said you would do. Thank you.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 13:39, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Don't try and reverse the onus here. TAP has been asked to prove it themself - and I'll be happily willing to retract. I can guarantee that I have indeed seen him comment accordingly in the last 7 days ... I'm just not going to be bullied into digging into it because I honestly don't care. The BIG question is, WILL HE NOW CHANGE. Focus on moving forward, which is what I have been pushing ALL ALONG (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

How could he prove a negative here? Without looking through all his talk space contribs (which I have already done) and providing diffs of every single one, showing that he didn't mention it? --Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 14:05, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

100% Supported? On current behaviour? No, I certainly don't "know" that. I'm not going to be replacing it, for reasons most of the people responding to you in this thread have made clear. I agree, TAP is not a perfect editor, but your review was not a productive review, and WP:SPADE is an essay which has nothing to do with your statements. From an outside perspective - I'd had almost nothing to do with TAP until today - it was direct editor bashing. As I said, why don't you replace it with something constructive? Worm(talk) 14:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Whilst TAP does seem a little materialistic and pushy at times, I would have to agree with Worm here. He's show a willingness to learn, and unlike certain other editors on here learns from his mistakes and always correct his mistakes if there are any. I've given him a lot of tips on creation and he really does appear to be learning from them. His Bulgarian and Moroccan stubs, especially Bulgaria are informative and quite valuable new entries. And he has shown himself to produce decent content like The Wedding Dance in which we together produced a GA quality article but the article is largely his. I think he deserves to be treated a little better and given a chance to prove himself. I personally am not a fan of the masses of beetle stubs his and several others are producing as they are unlikely to be expanded but I think he has a lot of potential to produce a lot of good content and we need keen, bold editors. He has a few flaws, and seems to get sidetracked very easily, but deserves a chance to prove himself.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:10, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. And my review simply referred to the pain-in-the-ass portions of his all-too-recent history (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Word, Demiurge, and Dr Blofeld, to be honest. TAP came to me quite a while ago with numerous problems and I was unsure whether he'd cope here. He regularly requested rights he didn't need, reverted good faith edits as vandalism, made some poor NAC closures at Afd, etc etc. I've watch him slowly turn around his editing - he has taken on board a lot of advice that has been given him and has become a decent editor here. Of course, he's not perfect (are any of us?), but I am very impressed with TAP - he has not given up in the face of (sometimes unpleasant) criticism, he has taken advice from other users, and he has made a good contribution to the project. I would strongly challenge the assertion that he "believes that creating poor stubs is an actual substitute for writing articles": firstly, as Worm said, writing stubs is by no means an intinsically bad thing. Secondly, he has 3 good articles and 7 DYKs to his name. I would have agreed that he lacked clue a few months ago, but he has certainly improved recently; I don't think we can justly say that any more. TAP could certainly improve, but I have no doubts that he will, and am very confident that he will take in his stride anything that other editors believe he could improve. ItsZippy 13:52, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

As I said above, more than once, especially in what should have been a closure of this thread, how he behaves as he moves forward will tell all about the editor. Period. End of sentence. It's EXACTLY what I strongly hinted at in his editor review, and exactly what I have said in this entire fricking thread. Grow up people. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

A question on Balkans editing

Hi there. At the moment, it is all quiet on the Balkan-related subjects so I'll take this chance to ask you - are you officially in charge of disciplinary on Balkan related editing? The reason I ask is that if problems do re-emerge, would it not be better to address you here directly rather than go through the formalities of ANI. Obviously if a user is being reported then I'd still link him to the section but I'm just curious as to what to do. If the other admins are happy enough to leave this one to you, it will just be painful viewing for them to read the same old blah-blah. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 08:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

All admins are responsible - in fact, I rarely get involved in ArbComm Enforcement issues. However, if the event is related to the breaking of ArbCom restrictions, either ANI - or more formall ArbComm Enforcement should be used (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

BWG Foods

Hi Bwilkins. I am wondering could you advise/help me on this one, an editor, Malachyhanberry -an SPI, is editing this page and has a COI, he is, qouting the additions he has made, "sales and retail advisory services director of BWG Foods". He has added certain onesided phrases, leading and such in the article which I have removed or tidied around SPAR Ireland is renowned as a leader in convenience retailing . I have added to his talkpage User talk:Malachyhanberry to show him COI and general style, the five pillars and such. Have I been abit heavy or blunt? I dont think I have but maybe an admin (yourself hopefully) interacting with him would help him understand WP:NOT. I dont feel it warrants AN/I, even with the COI, as it is only effecting one article and I believe he just types "sales speak" as part of his mind set if you get my drift. Thanks for your time. Murry1975 (talk) 11:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I have changed the welcome template you gave him with {{Welcome-coi}} which directly addresses COI issues. I have also removed some non-encyclopedic content - although it sure needs trimming. I'll add it to my watchlist for a bit (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:17, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the (very) quick response. Murry1975 (talk) 11:19, 17 June 2012 (UTC)