User talk:TransporterMan
|
This will ensure that conversations remain together! |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
Thanks!
N5iln has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!
oldcsd
Re: GoodSearch opinion
Thank you for the information. Understand the comments and agree with the suggestion. Uptodateinfo
{{Hangon}} for Course Selection at Earl Haig Secondary School
I have once again put the {{Hangon}} Template on the article, but I'm quite unsure why this article would be moved to deletion. It doesn't seem to have vandalized the copyrighted content, and also doesn't seem to have plagiarized someone's work. I can see what you are talking about, but I think that this article shouldn't be deleted. Otherwise, I will improve this article to Wikipedia's standard. But thanks for your notice.
Please contact me if you have any concerns.
Besides I'm only a Wikipedian for less than 6 months so I'm quite inexperienced. However the quality and standard of my articles will improve. Challisrussia (talk)
Village with offensive name
Just looked at your referral for Kotak, a village with an allegedly offensive name. The offensive word would be kotok (which is offensive slang for penis in at least Kyrgyz. However, Kotak should be ok -- it also appears on google maps for roughly the same location shown in the article -- Google Map of Kotak. Thanks for checking up on it, though! ~~
Wikiquette Alerts Notice Response
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Re:
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
¡Thanks For The Heads-Up!
Binkernet would no doubt have been more than happy for me to have been unaware of the changes in that page; Thank you for the heads up. A REDDSON
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
DRN
Hey mate, DRN looks a bit backlogged. Can you give me a hand clearing out some of the old requests?
Updated
Hello, User:TransporterMan I have updated the dispute resolution discussion to reflect the changes you requested. I have also made edits to my User-pages for both User:olowe2011 and User:Wiki-Impartial. Thank you for alerting me to the requirement for these changes and I should have added these before. Furthermore if you would like to provide me further advice on Dispute resolution i'm very open to any and all suggestions you can give me on the talk page for User:Wiki-Impartial. --Olowe2011 (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for that. We've had occasion in the past when a party to the dispute would create a sockpuppet and then try to mediate the dispute to their advantage, so the parties really need to be able to know who they're trusting. Please refrain from bringing up conduct issues at DRN except to the minimal extent needed to prevent them from interfering with the discussion of content issues there. The discussion you've raised about edit warring and 3RR violations is not helpful. In truth, I would strongly recommend that you might begin gaining dispute resolution experience here at Wikipedia by working at Third Opinion before trying DRN more. (I work at both places, by the way.) With less than 600 edits, you really need to build up more experience of Wikipedia rules and customs before tackling the more difficult disputes which come to DRN and 3O is a good place to do it. That's just advice: anyone can volunteer at DRN who cares to do so, but it can be a difficult place to work even with a great deal of experience since some of the editors who come there for help are very experienced themselves. Heck, I work at 3O, DRN, and am a member of the Mediation Committee, and about all I do at Wikipedia is dispute resolution, and there are disputes which come to DRN that I won't touch with a ten-foot pole. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- I can see why, its like a minefield. Also this email notification - Will this be in my Personal Email Inbox and if so which account does this apply to, Both olowe2011 and Wiki-Impartial are setup with different personal email addresses. Secondly I will look over the Third Opinion things and get to know it better, It's good to see a level headed Wikipedian running these kinds of things. Regardless I will get to gaining experience as suggested. --Olowe2011 (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
DRN stuff
Hi TransporterMan, I'm still continuing with the current case at DRN. We're up to 12,000+ words I think and we still have a ways to go yet :-) I'm comfortable continuing till the end but if at anytime you have any advice or insights or feedback I'm open to benefiting from your experience. Also when it's over I'd like to check in with you and see if there was something I should have done differently in hindsight. For example maybe this case could have been better served at Mediation and I should have referred it there at the beginning or middle. I'm not sure, as I'm still developing this skill set. So just some thoughts for now. Again thanks for your support, guidance and input. Best, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 05:21, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- I think you're doing one hell of a good job and feel like you ought to be giving the rest of us tips, not the other way around. As for the question of whether or not this should have been referred to mediation, well, that's something that's up in the air between DRN and MEDCOM. We made it easier for things to go to mediation, but only one or two have been referred there. I, personally, have no problem with them sticking at DRN if the volunteer who takes them on has the skill set, patience, and stickwithitiveness to handle them. You obviously do. I'd already extended the life of that dispute to November 30 since you were making progress with it and would have no problem extending it beyond that date (or you can do it yourself) if progress continues to be made. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the friendly feedback! I'll continue and we'll see how it goes. :-) -- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Arbcom
Re: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive256#One day left to nominate, Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013,[1] I would like to nominate you. The published rules say that you don't have to be an administrator (the real, unwritten rules may differ), and IMO you have the temperament needed. Would you be willing to run? --Guy Macon (talk)
- Guy, I am incredibly flattered, truly I am, but I think I'd rather not, at least not until after I (drum up the courage to) run for adminship again first and thus gain some experience dealing with conduct matters and I'm not ready to even do that yet. The day may come, but I'm just not there yet. Again, thanks very, very much for your confidence in me and I'll try to continue to deserve it in the things I do. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Next matchday scenarios
Hello! I invite you to a new discussion on the matter: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Next matchday scenarios. Ivan Volodin (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
DRN Coordinator
Hi Tman, I notice the Dec/Jan spot is now open, I'd like to take, which would leave the Feb/March spot open for you or others. Does that agree with you?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely fine by me. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:11, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
It seems that the Shusha case will close soon unless people respond. Shusha is a trouble spot for WP:ARBAA2. I left notes for three of the editors named in the Shusha request, Zimmarod, Roses&guns and Hablabar. If you have discretion on how quickly this closes, could you consider waiting long enough to see if anyone will respond to this encouragement? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 21:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks so much for chiming in. It helps!!! CaroleHenson (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:50, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Tuition Fees
Thanks for making the effort to get involved. I notice that your reference out on the talk page of Vince Cable has been reverted - I thought you might wish to deal with that; as an interested party I thought it best if I didn't. Bagunceiro (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Question over dispute resolution
Hi TransporterMan. I am currently having a dispute with another user on the Carl Lewis page. Basically I am arguing some editor used a questionable source to make a claim in the field of medicine. Such source is not corroborated or vaguely hinted by other more authoritative ones and reports only a questionable claim (no names, dates or written works etc only a statement like "someone believes that..."). Therefore I found it was an unacceptable source of truth as the scientific community is built around consensus and proven verifiable facts. The other editor thinks I haven't been successful in disproving such claim. He gives credit to the dubious claim but didn't show me a clear reliable source that can corroborate it. I'd like to ask you what would be the more appropriate way to resolve the dispute in Wikipedia as I've seen there are different options. You can find our discussion here talk. The dispute is under the paragraph "Carl Lewis reverted edit (II)". Thanks