Jump to content

User talk:Part

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Part (talk | contribs) at 12:42, 18 June 2017 (→Holiday season). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Part talk Leave messages here

Interests

  • Aviation
  • Aeronautics

Image cropping

As You have the original image (univzimlogo.jpg), You can do the cropping Yourself? Best, feydey 19:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

See Template_talk:Infobox_University for all fields available for university infobox. N.B. Sign your comments on talk pages by adding four tildes (~~~~). Cheers, feydey 08:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice addition with the motto, I was also thinking about adding that. feydey 23:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Underwood

A tag has been placed on James Underwood, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable (see the guidelines for notability here). If you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please write {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, articles #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -Runningonbrains 09:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I replied to your note on my talk page about Downside School? I've added a citation to the James Underwood article, it's to Who's Who 2007. regards, Xn4 12:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Brothers College, Bulawayo

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Christian Brothers College, Bulawayo, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.cbc.co.zw/, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:Christian Brothers College, Bulawayo. Then you should do one of the following:

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! --Interiot 22:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again ;)

I'm also in this Wikipedia.. as you can see.. but not that active.. mostly for Interwiki Links and research activities.. --J-PG ¬_¬ 21:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rail Gauge

Sorry, I put the rail box in the Camrail article but I don't know enough about gauges to write the gauge in. Try User:Tabletop. --McTrixie/Mr Accountable 08:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would have modified this box myself, except that this box refuses to be modified (revised), the box appears to be locked. All my attempts to change it failed. Peter Horn 16:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Christian Brothers College, Bulawayo

Hi there, thanks for the message. I don't actually have any connection to CBC Bulawayo apart from being a Christian Brothers alumnus (from Australia), and involvement with CB ministries. Ta for the compliment, I've had some practice putting these infoboxes together, and the College website is quite detailed in parts. When I have more time I might try to further expand on the article. Cheers. Rob Lindsey 23:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And a happy new year to you! :) I know about CBC Boksburg and Pretoria, but what is the Welkom school? I've never heard of it, and I'm doing all I can to make the Christian Brothers article as complete as possible. Thanks. Rob Lindsey 14:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I'll see what I can do. Rob Lindsey 21:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using tags meant for administrators

Regarding you most recent edit to Image:Sir Professor James Underwood.jpg (diff), you added a tag which is meant for the closing administrator to use if the consensus is to keep the image. I have reverted your edit, and please note that continued bad-faith use of that tag can be regarded as a form of vandalism. Sincerely, Oden 01:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cbcbyo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cbcbyo.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 06:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Cbcbyologo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cbcbyologo.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 06:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Statuecbcentrance.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Statuecbcentrance.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BigDT 06:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Africa. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Belovedfreak 11:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2007

Hi Part,

Wikimania 2007, which is being held in Taipei, Taiwan on August 3-5, is offering opportunities for travel scholarships to Wikimania for active users of Wikimedia projects from the continent of Africa. Although the original scholarship deadline has passed, please, if you are interested, you may still apply at Scholarships. Sincerely yours, Cary Bass 21:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Univzimlogo.jpg

Hello Part, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Univzimlogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Part. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP Zimbabwe

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Zimbabwe, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Greetings

... and you too Babakathy 20:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP Zimbabwe August 2007

The current Zimbabwe WikiProject Collaboration of the Fortnight is Not applicable!
Please read the nomination text and help improve the article to featured article standard if you can.

Mangwanani 08:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revamp

Just to let you know, I have completely revamped the WikiProject Zimbabwe page so that it is more uniform to the layout and design of other WikiProjects. Please have a look and try to fill in any of the new sections created. Your help is much appreciated. Many thanks, Mangwanani 17:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Very much for the Barnstar. It is much appreciated. Mangwanani 11:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harnessing Wikipedia

I saw your post on Mangwanani's page on harnessing Wikipedia to find a solution for Zimbabwe. Interesting.. What do you have in mind? Perspicacite 15:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Zimbabwean Barnstar of National Merit
For continued work on Zimbabwe-related articles and excellent recruiting of new members to WikiProject Zimbabwe. Awarded for contribution to WP:ZIM by Mangwanani 10:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

James Underwood

The other way around would probably be more in line with Wikipedia custom. But I'll leave it to you to decide, being an active editor on the article in question. -Duribald 11:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WPZW September

Hi,

The current Zimbabwe WikiProject Collaboration of the Fortnight is Not applicable!
Please read the nomination text and help improve the article to featured article standard if you can.

As the number of people taking part in WikiProject Zimbabwe grows, I have more and more people to notify of changes. If you havn't already done so, please could you add the notice board to your watch list so that I can add any changes there and only once not as many times as there are members. Many thanks, Mangwanani 13:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For your consideration. I shall keep her in mind. Mangwanani 13:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2008 scholarships

Hi, Part.

The scholarship process for Wikimania 2008 scholarships has not yet been commenced. Please either wait, or, in the interim, you may wish to send an email to wikimania-scholarships (at) wikimedia (dot) org and let them know why you consider yourself worthy of a scholarship :) Cary Bass demandez 14:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabet

Dont worry, you weren't the first and you won't be the last either... Mangwanani 14:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WP:UNI!!!

Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Universities! Our goals are to standardize the structure and content of all college and university articles, improve Wikipedia's coverage of these articles (hopefully propelling them to featured article status), and serve as the central resource for all discussions and information related to colleges and universities on Wikipedia.

A few features that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask one of the project participants or post a question on the talk page. We'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Noetic Sage 13:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue III (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! Noetic Sage 19:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue IV (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 23:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:General and Systematic Pathology.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:General and Systematic Pathology.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy 2008

And you. Mangwanani (talk) 15:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue V (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 22:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VI (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Delivered on 19:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VII (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Delivered on 18:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Rhodesian Bush War to Second Chimurenga name change?

There's currently some discussion going on the talk page Talk:Rhodesian Bush War. One user has proposed changing the name of the article Rhodesian Bush War to second Chimurenga. There appears to be some support and some opposition. Sf46 (talk) 11:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue VIII (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Delivered on 21:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Too true...

How are you doing? Mangwanani (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very well phrased I must say. It is indeed desperately saddening... Mangwanani (talk) 21:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Please kindly assist with the insertion of an image on the University of Zimbabwe page. I am having trouble as the image is located on the corresponding German article, but is not available in Commons. {{help me}} Part (talk) 11:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Happy New Year[reply]

Sure. :) What's the URL of the image? Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, found it. I'll see if it's licensed for Commons and move it over. PeterSymonds (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the image on the German Wikipedia (which I believe you uploaded in 2006), the logo doesn't appear to be compatible for Commons. Unless you know differently, the logo probably falls under fair-use, because the image is copyrighted by the University of Zimbabwe. Therefore a Commons upload would be impossible. If that's so, you can upload it here as a fair-use image, and then place it on the university page. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately it's not possible to link images across Wikimedia projects without their upload to Commons. To upload fair-use, see Wikipedia:Upload, which will give you a guide to uploading fair-use images. The reason the image link doesn't work is because the software doesn't recognise the image. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The image I've loaded up is the one faculty get for putting on memos etc, and the same as the one on the [www.uz.ac.zw website]. Not certain if the copyright is reserved, so uploaded it under fair use. Babakathy (talk) 12:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And happy New Year! Babakathy (talk) 12:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

University of Zimbabwe

Yes, well, deserved the prod I guess! Do you know where the statistics on faculty and students come from? They are rather high. Babakathy (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Am working on it, here for now. Trick is to get sources for things that are basically common knowledge in a community (I am also ex-faculty). Babakathy (talk) 11:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll put an appeal for photos on the discussion page once I shift the text to article-space. Hopefully someone out there has some pictures from humanities and elsewhere, I don't... Babakathy (talk) 13:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you get some time, I'd appreciate a non-partisan look at the page! Babakathy (talk) 09:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! What sort of issues do you have in mind for what UZ has done on the international arena? Babakathy (talk) 09:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

And happy new year to you too!

FA for UZ: A good idea indeed. Am doing some stuff on Great Zimbabwe currently, then back to it. Babakathy (talk) 06:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know who any of these people are:
  1. Basil Fletcher (professor)
  2. Langham
  3. Llewelyn
thanks. Babakathy (talk) 14:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments of 2011

To you too man! Thanks. Am mostly lurking these days, but will drop in when I can. All the best. Babakathy (talk) 18:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments of 2012

and the very best to you too mate. A bit busy at work these days but patrolling and adding the odd thing when I can. Must get back to UZ and Cholera articles but maybe not this quarter. Babakathy (talk) 09:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate.Babakathy (talk) 06:32, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Wikipedians in Residence in Africa

Hello,

I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabell@doualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahf@africacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.

If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/

Best regards, Islahaddow

(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

University of Zimbabwe

Fixed - anon IP had scrambled some codes while trying to add someone (himself?) to the list of notable alumni. Babakathy (talk) 09:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments of 2013

All the best to you too mate. How are you doing? Babakathy (talk) 07:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!
Hi Part! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Live updates

Hi. Based on Wikipedia policies and guidlines we should not provide livescores and live updates. This based on WP:LIVESCORES and WT:FOOTY consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live scoring and it has also been discussed many more times. This also applies to tables and list such as top goalscorers and other match info, which you can also read about at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 81#Live updates (again). Please wait until matches are finished before adding the score. QED237 (talk) 21:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments of 2014

Wishing you the very best for the year mate. Babakathy (talk) 06:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Death and state funeral of Nelson Mandela

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiindaba

Hi Part!

I'm happy and sad: sad that you missed WikiIndaba this year, but happy to introduce you to Wikimedia South Africa. Please go to our website and follow the links to our mailing list and facebook page. If you have trouble signing up for the mailing list, please let me know.

Welcome! --Slashme (talk) 11:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Part,

So that I can follow up, where and how did you register? --Slashme (talk) 18:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiIndaba and Wikipedia movement in Africa

Dear Part

Mangwanani!! ... I have only just found your request about getting involved in Wiki Indaba and other Wikimedia projects. Wiki Indaba was the start of something bigger. We are still looking for people to be involved in growing the movement. The ongoing conversation will be held on this list, so please subscribe.


I have been very keen to find Wikipedians in Zimbabwe, and to start up stronger groups in Harare and/or Bulawayo, but have not managed to find anyone who is based there who can get involved. Are you based in Zim? Please feel free to contact me on my email for more details (isla [at] wikiafrica [dot] net) if you are keen to activate more people on the ground. If you want to get involved in the wider Open Movement in Africa, you can add your name to this list African Open Advocates List; if you want to subscribe to WikiAfrica's mailing list, add your details here

Thanks for getting in touch - I look forward to hearing from you! Isla Haddow (talk) 09:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oral citations experiment - Namibia 2014

Hello Pgallert! I noticed a conversation between you and Isla Haddow just below my interaction with Isla. I'm very interested in attending and participating in this Participatory Design conference. Although I might not have in-depth expertise of Indigenous knowledge systems, I have been on Wikipedia for eight years - reasonably active (I'm sure you're well aware of the internet access issues in Southern Africa). By October, I would have come up to speed with Indigenous knowledge systems - already, I find your work engaging (I've seen your draft Chapter 1) and totally agree that more work must be done to reflect how other cultures transmit their knowledge. What can I do to participate? I know people in Namibia who might be able to offer me accommodation (allowing me to devote more funding to travelling - I will need funding I must mention). Part (talk) 12:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Part, you probably already saw Wikipedia:Oral citations experiment. If you want to be considered you would have to pick a topic from the list at the bottom of that page and develop its content. The deadline has long passed, but if you can do that before or on August 10 I could still consider your application. Just let me know if you have further questions. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 13:42, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Pgallert. I have chosen hunting of the Mbanderu people. Despite my best efforts, I cannot find any information on this topic. The culture of the Mbanderu people seems to overlap with that of the e.g. Herero people, but there is still scant information with respect to hunting. Part (talk) 00:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is as much as I could find: "Using dogs and traps are the traditional methods of hunting. [1]." I could not make this into a distinct Hunting section because of limited information, so I put it under Culture. Hopefully this can be expanded with oral knowledge/citations. Please see Mbanderu people.

References

  1. ^ "Historical Colour Photographs of Tswana Chiefdoms and Hereros in Exile". Retrieved 2014-08-09.
Hello Pgallert. What's the way forward regarding my attendance of the October workshop? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Part (talk • contribs) 09:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Pgallert. I saw your email - I don't mind if you make public your reason(s) for rejection. I am of the opinion the community should know because attempts are being made to build Wikipedia representation in Africa. Part (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS. I did not put a bare url as a reference - "Comparison of edits on Mbanderu people article". You added "{Reflist}" to your talk page where I had forgotten to put it - apologies for implying you added "{Reflist} to the Mbanderu people article. Part (talk) 11:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: "Peter Gallert grant application" Please note the extra {} were omitted from reflist.

Although you say I do not have the appropriate level of expertise in referencing, here is an article I created - one of several - where I have referenced. In this article I have more than 25 references which have stood the test of time (more than ~5 years online), an infobox, reference even books, have external links, categories, re-direct page, etc. Example article Part (talk) 11:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Part, I did not agree to have my emails published here, please do not insert them again. The article in question is from 2009, is the only article without large unreferenced pieces that you ever produced, and still the majority of the references contains just title, accessdate, and url. While not strictly 'bare references' in Wikipedia-speak, they are still missing authors, publishers, pagination, context... in other words, all what will be important in the context of our workshop.
Six of the references have this information: author, year, title, publisher, city, pagination, etc Part (talk) 10:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]
To quote from the grants document: The workshop facilitators vet the entries that have been produced, as well as the general Wikipedia experience of the applicants. Prospective participants must, as a minimum, have produced content on English Wikipedia that still exists, and that even after thorough scrutiny would not be deleted or be peppered with maintenance templates. --Pgallert (talk) 11:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was not hunting for singular errors. I'm sorry and understand that you are disappointed, and will give some more detail via email. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"the only article without large unreferenced pieces that you ever produced" I don't know if these articles I've produced have large unreferenced regions or are large unreferenced pieces Example 2, Example 3, Example 4, etc Part (talk) 15:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC) Articles I've created found here HERE Part (talk) 15:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Part, I do know how to get the list of the articles you created, there is no need to shout at me by bolding your posts, and I'm not sure if it makes sense to discuss their referencing here, as I seem not to have the ability to bring my concerns across. If you are interested in particular reviews, maybe we can lead that discussion on the respective article talk pages? --Pgallert (talk) 15:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was just providing evidence, because I don't think it's true that "the only article without large unreferenced pieces that (I) you ever produced" was that one. I try and make it as easy as possible for anyone to quickly verify my evidence. Part (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You write, "there is no need to shout at me by bolding your posts". You are free to have your interpretation of me shouting. I was not shouting at you - I started using bold face above, that was not directed at you. Also, in the text you removed Deleted text, before my alleged shouting occurred, I in fact put in bold what you were writing, not what I was writing. I use bold font, and/or color to make it easier for readers to identify who is writing and also to highlight what I deem to be important text. You put some text in italics, which originally was not in italics. I did not interpret this as shouting. Part (talk) 19:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Before you asked me to try and work on something, you had access to my editing history. It is only after I tried working on something that you raise concerns about my previous editing; concerns which I find debatable. Part (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Peter Beighton may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {{Order of Mapungubwe|state=collapsed}}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:51, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Please help me with... Hi, having a challenge with infobox here Marcus Byrne. Please help.

Part (talk) 19:04, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Mismatched brackets can have strange effects. Huon (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Please help me with...

I'm having trouble uploading this file: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776369/figure/F0003/

Here's the meta data:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

{{subst:Upload marker added by en.wp UW}}

File information
Description

Template:Lang-en

Source

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776369/figure/F0003/

Date

2009

Author

Shafi SM, Malla MA, Salaam PA, Kirmani OS

Permission
(Reusing this file)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776369/


Thanks in advance for your understanding.

Part (talk) 08:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Part: Since this is an open access journal, distributed under CC-BY, you can upload the image to Wikimedia Commons using the UploadWizard there and selecting the appropriate license. It should automatically create the metadata for you with some help. Thanks! --MarkTraceur (talk) 14:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Please help me with...making the image in this infobox smaller Alimuddin Zumla. Thanks.

Part (talk) 18:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed - when using an infobox, you don't need the brackets or the File prefix. Primefac (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

For the article , thanks. :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Quarraisha Abdool Karim) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Quarraisha Abdool Karim, Part!

Wikipedia editor Sfan00 IMG just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Do she have a publication history other than the study mentioned?

To reply, leave a comment on Sfan00 IMG's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

The thought with the comment was that you might want to ask WikiPRoject Medecine to take a look through the history and pick out key papers. Doing a literature review for a specifc academic is not easy though. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Please help me with...Margaret Mungherera, I don't know why the Persondata is appearing in this article instead of being hidden. Thanks. Part (talk) 21:21, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Part (talk) 21:21, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A strange effect due to a fragment of a succession box. I removed that; now the persondata is hidden as it should be. Huon (talk) 21:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I actually thought I had removed it, but Huon was editing simultaneously, but then I had made some other minor changes so my edit actually went through (I was amazingly confused for a minute after I looked at the page history b/c it went through even though I had no edit conflict). I've removed the cleanup tag, that was addressed to the error.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Connie Ferguson image.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Connie Ferguson image.jpeg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Information icon Hello, I'm Nomoskedasticity. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Philip Baker (obstetrician)‎ that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. "Nomo is biased and even intellectually dishonest", in [1] Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomoskedasticity you seem to be intellectually dishonest. I pointed out that the date is June and not July which is supported by the two references you cited. Am I not telling the truth about the date? Are you not being dishonest? Part (talk) 08:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Philip Baker (obstetrician)‎. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My comment of intellectual dishonesty is not a personal attack please see (Personal attack removed) I am sorry and apologize if you perceived it this way. Part (talk) 08:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do not accept an apology that is framed in terms of something I have done. If you want to apologize, you can apologize for something you have done. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is amazing, you reverted to a version that I pointed out is incorrect. Nomoskedasticity do you dispute this? I point out this is not proper (backed by evidence - which means this is not a personal attack), next thing you are slapping me with threats of being blocked from editing. I apologize for removing your first reference when I first came across the article, I have subsequently not quibbled about this since it was put back. I have no objection to you mentioning the admission in the article as long as what is written is factually correct. Part (talk) 09:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Part, you really need to drop the stick. (And aren't you the one who said "I think I give up, I don't have time to continue this"?) In addition, while considering this a personal attack is debatable (and I'm not sure what "intellectually dishonest" is supposed to mean), it's ironic that you call Nomo biased when the person who really appears to be biased is you because you don't seem to want to keep any negative, well-sourced biographical information in the article. Mr. Baker messed up, so he resigned. Live with it and move on. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 18:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Erpert did you see this edit from an "anonymous" IP 64.222.64.38? very likely by Nomoskedasticity. You fail to mention that Nomoskedasticity has repeatedly reverted to a version that is incorrect, open vandalsim by Nomo. This is dishonest by Nomo. There is no where I disagreed with the admission, I was upfront about that. Part (talk) 19:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Philip Baker (obstetrician) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Also, read WP:AGF and WP:NOTVAND. Just because an IP makes an edit doesn't make it vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ian.thomson. I stated why it was vandalism in the edit summary - "Unknown" IP reverted to a wrong date, etc. Otherwise I agree that IP edits are not necessarily vandalism, but in this case I gave reasons why and this can be checked/verified. 06:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See my response on my talk page. In short: if your problem was just the date, you'd've only removed the word "July" instead of using it as an excuse to change other content and your latest edit to the page was a manual revert but still a revert. Not related to your block, but the source you're using can only, at best, be used to establish that Baker claims Gawande didn't take offense. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Philip Baker (obstetrician). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Ian.thomson (talk) 09:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Part (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Ian.thomson I'm sure you can see how Nomoskedasticity deliberately reverted to a wrong date repeatedly and possibly even using a different IP, Nomoskedasticity was smart enough to avoid being blocked by apparently using a different IP. I have added balance to the article. In addition NPOV states representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been ... The only part of the article with two references is the contentious issue. Is this then a proportionate representation of the subject? I see systematic bias creeping in and I think this is one of the major reasons Wikipedia is loosing editors by making it hard for inexperienced editors to navigate the complex rules, while experienced editors can apply technicalities and use IP addresses, etc. to mask their dishonest conduct and get away with it at the expense of loosing editors who might have something to contribute. Nomoskedasticity's initial article was not a fair representation of the subject according to NPOV and was not factually accurate. I respectfully request you unblock me. Part (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Absolutely none of that deals with the fact that you edit-warred, which is the reason for the block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You might want to read WP:NOTTHEM and revise your post. Also, WP:No personal attacks includes allegations which lack evidence. You would need to provide evidence that the IP addresses that reverted you belonged to Nomoskedasticity when making accusations.
Multiple editors have explained for you that the source you cited fails WP:RS. You have not explained how it meets WP:RS. Explaining that now will not get you unblocked, but you will need to do that if you want to avoid getting blocked if you use that source again.
The "this is what's wrong with Wikipedia" bit is pretty standard for requests that get rejected by admins. You might want to revise that part. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ian.thomson thanks for your response. That's the point I can't prove it's him/her and he/she has used a sophisticated technical approach which is what you're doing to censure me. Never mind, the systematic bias is clear and you're part of it. I have no interest in editing that article anymore. Part (talk) 13:08, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For the record Ian.thomson writes "Multiple editors have explained for you that the source you cited fails WP:RS.", while only one editor mentioned this Nomoskedasticity on one occasion. This is evidence of the systematic bias and use of technicalities to censure others while living others scot free. Part (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree with User:JamesBWatson he/she doesn't seem to appreciate that Nomoskedasticity clearly violated NPOV and deliberately reverted to an incorrect version (which prompted my editing). None of the other parties have said anything to censure Nomoskedasticity. Further evidence of systematic bias even by an administrator. 19:22, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Part (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The administrator writes "blocked Part ... with an expiry time of 24 hours (account creation blocked) (Edit warring: at Philip Baker (obstetrician), with claims of reverting vandalism to cover up content changes)" I did not claim vandalism, what occurred was real vandalism change to a wrong date and yes I also changed the content, but it still remained factually true and supported by the references. I make another unblock request to test the extent of systematic bias. 1. Is what I reverted not vandalism i.e. wrong date? Are the changes I made not factually true? Why was user Nomoskedasticity not censured in any way? I want to demonstrate that systematic bias exists and technical rules are unfairly applied to censure relatively inexperienced editors with limited capacity to navigate the complexity of the rules. Part (talk) 20:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'd call what you did there "whitewashing". You repeatedly removed well-sourced relevant content. That's edit-warring, and you're not addressing it at all. Huon (talk) 21:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thanks Huon, please give the specific examples of where I repeatedly removed well-sourced relevant content. I removed admitted and put accused which is factually true, perhaps you haven't read the articles, first there were accusations, then a resignation, then admission. I fully agree to that and that is supported by the references. The last edit I made which led to this block had accused and admitted and was the most comprehensive account of the event ever made on the page. And you too fail to comment on systematic bias Part (talk) 21:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Huon, Ian.thomson, Nomoskedasticity, JamesBWatson and Erpert for participating in a Wikipedia experiment whose results will appear next year (due to peer review and publishing lag). Part (talk) 21:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Baker admitted he plagiarized the speech, confirmed by The Star (whose wording strongly suggests that the admission predates the resignation, not postdates it). Removed here, here, here, here. The last time you claimed vandalism for no good reason that wouldn't also apply to your own edits. That's not even addressing the other problems with your conduct, which I find more and more troubling the deeper I look into the issue. The above claim of a "Wikipedia experiment" sounds like grounds for a WP:NOTHERE indefinite block to me. The "systematic bias" claim is not accompanied by any evidence. Huon (talk) 22:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An experiment/study has been conducted and and will be published from this experience. I have stated clearly if you read the initial talk page that I do not disagree with the admission. What does the first reference I quoted on the talk page state, even in title? That he resigned following accusations while an investigation was ongoing. I have provided evidence of systematic bias. Part (talk) 23:11, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The study will focus on my own conduct and the conduct of the highlighted editors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias
Last edit here for complete publicly available audit trail. The study will contribute to further understanding the dynamics between Wikipedia editors and how this can be improved. Part (talk) 00:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the "social experiment" claim. Seen that one before. Never has any effect on or off the site, it seems. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:34, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is real Ian.thomson, at some point I realized this is a good opportunity to study the dynamics and get some insights. It didn't start out as such but rich data has been generated. Part (talk) 08:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Will you be including your violation of site policies in the study? There's a reason that real social scientists usually remain independent of what they're studying -- they don't want to skew the results with their presence. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:42, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your recent remarks are clearly a childish attempt to intimidate, but let's leave that aside. Meanwhile, let me just point out that while you claim that I don't "seem to appreciate that Nomoskedasticity clearly violated NPOV and deliberately reverted to an incorrect version", you have fundamentally missed the point of what my role as an administrator was. I came to this page to review a request for an unblock on your account, and that's what I did. Whether anyone else was at fault is irrelevant, as the block is about your actions. "Yes, your honour, I did beat him up, but I shouldn't be convicted, because he murdered someone" is not a valid defence. Get it? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The study will go through formal peer review and as I have mentioned my conduct will be objectively evaluated like all the parties involved JamesBWatson Part (talk) 09:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments of 2016

Happy new year mate and all the best. Babakathy (talk) 08:12, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do that again.

Hi Part,
As you are a long time editor, you know Wikipedia's policies about living people.
Perhaps it would be best if we leave it at that.
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:05, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response. I do not know which policy or policies you are referring to, please provide the link and and explanation. You seem to be defending your actions by not being transparent about your reasons. Part (talk) 11:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with you that I am partially defending my actions by not being transparent about my reasons, as you put it. I will not resile from continuing to not mention the subject of the article that you wrote, and that I deleted.
The reason for this is Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
From what I can see, if the article had not been deleted, would it have it gone through a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion discussion and it would have been deleted as very obviously not meeting the WP:BLP1E part of that policy. That process would take maybe two weeks. In that time, the article would have been addedd to various Wikipedia data scraping websites that Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation has no control over. The indignity suffered by the subject of the that you wrote, and that I deleted, would then be there for anyone to see.
I admit that I did not go through the regular processes when I deleted that article. I assert that the policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons trumps the essay Wikipedia:Process is important every time.
If you think I breached my community-granted administrator privileges, then please do start a discussion at WP:ANI about me.
(Technically WP:AN would be place to start this, but WP:ANI is the default notice-board for everything.)
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Response Part (talk) 12:07, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yondo Sister, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congolese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jamie Vardy. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Qed237 (talk) 22:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Qed237 is not an Administrator. The Almightey Drill and I had requested an admin to arbitrate. Part (talk) 23:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an administrator but that does not mean that you can keep edit warring on the article to insert your preferred version without consensus. Qed237 (talk) 23:33, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Part reported by User:Qed237 (Result: ). Thank you. Qed237 (talk) 23:32, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Jamie Vardy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  slakr\ talk / 05:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Part (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Although technically I violated the three-revert rule, I was using the - "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.". This is part of my ongoing research (see above) to document systemic bias and how editors including administrators are involved in its perpetuation. Qed237, The Almightey Drill, Slakr. Part (talk) 08:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please read further down the page you quote, to the part where it says "Don't try and use it to get around WP:CONSENSUS..." Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:47, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Regarding your research: So... you're here for reasons other than building an encyclopedia? I've seen that claim on occasion in unblock requests, but that's all that ever happens with it. Wikipedia as a whole generally isn't concerned about such research because it's invariably a bluff intended to coerce us into complying, which we don't take kindly to. This is not how professional academic or journalistic research is conducted these days, so the furthest it could go is a blog that maybe a few friends read, some more click "like" for social purposes, maybe the next person claiming to do "research" cites as part of some claim that "admins are out to get us"... but the rest of the world largely remains unaware of. When anthropologists go into the field, they attempt to fit in with the group how they can instead of disrupting the local customs for purposes of showing some supposed injustice within that community. Now, if a member of ArbCom (i.e. some of the best editors we have) wrote something about systematic bias and revealed that they'd be gathering research for years to show that there's some network of admins out to get people, that'd have an effect outside of Wikipedia.
As for "Ignore all rules": IAR applies to itself, it is not a trump card that lets whoever says it first win the argument. But let's say for a moment that we did apply WP:IAR to WP:3RR in this case. We have multiple users who have reached a consensus on the talk page for why the material you added should not be included, for reasons based on long-standing, site-wide consensuses (i.e. policies and guidelines). If we let everyone reverting, the article will mostly retain the form without your addition (IAR does not apply only to you). Still, that's unnecessarily disruptive and a waste of everyone's time. That's why it's easier to just enforce 3RR. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Research can improve the building of an encyclopedia - I of course did not expect to be unblocked. I am collecting data Boing! said Zebedee and Ian.thomson. Part (talk) 11:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contests

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me - family tree

I am trying to also separately draw a family tree in addition to the ancestry diagram which would include wives and children for Nelson Mandela similar to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Obama_family_tree.

I was going to suggest asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).--Launchballer 13:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Part. You have new messages at VarunFEB2003's talk page.
Message added VarunFEB2003 I am Offline 14:05, 6 August 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

August 2016

Information icon Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Abdominal pregnancy. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox error

I am having challenges with the infobox for Maria Mutola.

An improperly-closed wikilink was causing trouble with the template. Fixed. -- AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 13:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of information - systemic bias

Midnightblueowl deleted ancestry information from Nelson Mandela that s/he believes is fairly trivial although other page(s) on Wikipedia have this information. This is very likely systemic bias. I reverted the edit. Part (talk) 22:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok... please use the {{admin help}} template you need the help of an administrator. Mkdwtalk 00:08, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's an unreferenced ancestry chart that only mentions Mandela's two parents and no one else in his family. In its current state it's really bad, although has the potential to be improved if done properly. There is already a Talk Page discussion open to debate the merit of such a chart. Rather than edit warring to add this controversial section in to the article, I would ask Part to engage with the Talk Page discussion, which they have not at present done. That would be the appropriate way to go about things and would allow us to build constructively on their concerns. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Midnightblueowl did not only delete the chart. S/he deleted referenced scientific ancestry information and perhaps fails to recognise that Mandela came from a culture with predominantly oral transmission of ancestry information precluding detailed written knowledge of his grandparents. Besides, the body of the article supports the information in the chart with solid references. Also Midnightblueowl creates the impression I have not engaged in debate on the merits of such a chart. I have here ancestry section and the consensus was the chart was appropriate. I contend that systemic bias is at play. Part (talk) 09:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm.. that information was cited to an article in SouthAfrica.info, which doesn't look like a top quality source. If we had an article in a peer-reviewed journal discussing the same information (which may be the case) then I would be happy to include information on Mandela's genetic ancestry. Anyway, we already do have a section on Talk:Nelson Mandela devoted to this issue, so why not come discuss it there? There's really not much point having a separate discussion here on your own User Talk Page. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, I was the one who added all of the "solid references" that you refer to into the article in the first place! Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:50, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also the Wikipedia article on List of haplogroups of historic people lists the same information that Midnightblueowl has again reverted and says is not from a top quality source although the information was broadcast on South African national TV by prominent scientists and is extensively referenced. I now see from Midnightblueowl that she is from Western Europe. I thus continue gathering data on systemic bias (see above) and will revert her edit. Part (talk) 10:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What the hell? You accuse me of some racial or geographical bias against Southern Africa because I insist on using good quality sources in the Nelson Mandela article? What utter nonsense. I've told you on multiple occasions that I removed that section because a) much of it is too basic and unreferenced, and b) the other bit links to a website that may not be a reliable source. I've pointed out to you that this is an issue being discussed over at Talk:Nelson Mandela and invited you to contribute there, but you have ignored my suggestion. Instead you have continued to edit war and here you falsely accuse me of vandalism. You are way out of line here, Part. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely Midnightblueowl, I accuse you of systemic bias. Your world view is that "If we had an article in a peer-reviewed journal..." and you fail to tolerate any other credible view point/information source. All the information you deleted is perfectly true as highlighted by the links I provided. Part (talk) 10:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
South Africa has peer-reviewed journals, Part... What I ask for is that when discussing scientific issues, we use scientific publications (i.e. peer-reviewed journals) as opposed to online news services which so often pervert the information presented by scientific researchers. (and that goes as much for Southern African news services as it does for European, Asian, American ones etc). Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
List of haplogroups of historic people, which includes Nelson Mandela has four credible references. Part (talk) 10:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to debate this here any more. Take it to Talk: Nelson Mandela. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Midnightblueowl. I have taken it there. Part (talk) 10:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Part You currently have three admin help requests open about the same subject. Centralize it at Talk:Nelson Mandela and in only one section to avoid WP:ADMINSHOP/venue shopping. Mkdwtalk 16:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mkdw Ok thanks. Part (talk) 19:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Mkdwtalk 06:28, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mkdw for letting me know. Part (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have managed to get hold of the protocol-chair. The study has been stopped with immediate effect. We apologise unreservedly for these unforeseen and unintended consequences and we would like to reiterate that confidentiality and anonymity were key aspects in the study's design. Part (talk) 13:28, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We have done what we can to rectify our mistakes. We accept the consequences. Part (talk) 13:41, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Part I suggest you read how to use the template {{outdent}}. You shouldn't start every comment with it. It's meant to carry on a conversation that has been indented several times. Mkdwtalk 14:44, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Mkdwtalk 14:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • To reiterate what was summarized at ANI#Editor not here to build an encyclopedia, the community has reached a consensus that your presence on Wikipedia has been disruptive and unethical. Examples and issues have been raised as far back as October 2015 which have included two blocks and lengthy discussions. Your affiliation with this purported "research group" has been of deep concern to many editors, especially since you have actively engaged and sometimes seemingly antagonized editors and then made claims that these discussions will be published as part of a study. You have provided very few details about the study and even fewer assurances. In many cases, editors expressed their non-consent to the study and you loosely cited the creative commons license. You have hereby been blocked indefinitely. If you wish to return to editing, we strongly suggest you contact arbcom at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org to fully disclose the details of the study, what will be done with the information that has already been collected, and the contact information of your protocol-chair. I will also mirror the comments from several of the editors at the ANI report that you are responsible for your own actions and there is a discomfort in you operating on behalf of this "research group". Mkdwtalk 14:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Community ban

Per community consensus in this discussion, you have been indefinitely banned from editing en-Wikipedia.

More information on bans can be found at Wikipedia:Banning policy. Community bans may be appealed as follows: "Bans imposed by the community may be appealed to the community or to the Arbitration Committee (Special:EmailUser/Arbitration_Committee or arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org)" More info can be found at WP:UNBAN --NeilN talk to me 01:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NeilN: @Mkdw: Please may you un-ban me? I was wrong and made a mistake. I have now educated myself on the relevant policies and guidelines and promise not to repeat a similar thing again. I will stick to encyclopaedic activities. Please consider it a mitigating factor that I expressed remorse for my actions and have been otherwise around for almost ten years without incident. Part (talk) 17:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You were banned by community consensus two months ago. It is very unlikely that the community would reverse their decision in such a short period of time. I would recommend you wait 6-12 months before contemplating an appeal to the community. [I should also mention that you will likely face significant inquiry into your involvement in these studies. Something that will likely require full disclosure and an opportunity from ArbCom to speak with them to verify]. Mkdwtalk 21:00, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Mkdw:. Ok. Part (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday season

Happy holidays mate @Babakathy:. I suppose my editing days are over. Bye. Part (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Been inactive for ages, just read this now. Sorry to hear of everything that went wrong mate. Hope they will be able to reconsider in due course.Babakathy (talk) 09:22, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message mate. Just reading this now @Babakathy:. Nice to see you back. I too hope in due course they will reconsider. Part (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Part. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Part&oldid=786281422"