Those are very nice lyrics, Risker. I keep The Paradoxical Commandments next to my computer, in plain sight, for days such as these. Enjoy your well deserved break. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Do take the well deserved break

Hi Risker, you really don't know me but I got brought here following some difs, not important at this time. You have a thankless job being both an administrator and also an arbitrator. Definitely take the wikibreak and stay away from here. It is good to spend some time away, I myself just did this recently. I don't expect an answer so don't worry. Go enjoy! :) --CrohnieGal 19:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

RS/N comment about Life University situation

Note section there. -- Brangifer (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Requesting a copyedit

I'm working up an article in my userspace. It's not quite finished yet (I'm planning, perhaps, 250-300 more words), but I'd appreciate if you'd take your prettifying brush to it at some point. UnitAnode 19:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Gave it a quick going over, a few copy edits and one tag for clarification. Looks pretty good. I assume you will finish up with more details about the assassination and perhaps something about his legacy? Nice work. Risker (talk) 16:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a ton! I've actually been thinking about how to approach his "legacy", since it's shrouded in such mystery. There are some historians that view him as nothing more than an opportunistic piece of trash, basically, and others that view him as something of a crusading reformer. Additionally, there's not been a ton written on him, apart from his assassination, but I'm going to see what I can find. I'm hoping for a move to the mainspace within a few days. UnitAnode 16:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• I have a quick question, with regards to referencing the work. I don't particularly care much for in-line, as it detracts from the actual prose. I was wondering if you thought it would be acceptable to remove the inlines, and simply have a "Sources" section or some such thing, where I list my source material for the article? Thanks! UA 17:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

  If this is unacceptable in an article, could you let me know the proper way to write the refs in such a way that they're properly formatted? UA 01:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Ooops, sorry, I've been somewhat distracted, and neglected to answer your prior question. Generally speaking, the practice of omitting inline references has been deprecated, and has been for several years. The citation templates I tend to use are at Misplaced Pages:Citation templates, but you can also check out WP:CITE for some simpler formats. Curious that two people would ask about citations the same night! Risker (talk) 03:22, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Guess I'll check those links out, and see if I can get it figured out. Thanks, UA 03:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Risker. Thank you for the note on my page. It is precisely the point I'm trying to make (if I can only edit as Outriggr, then my name somehow proceeds me, and the edits can't be much good if the only thing stopping their reversion is my name). I'm not suggesting that my edits under another account were a "test" along those lines (the reality is that I've locked myself out of my main account... and I don't have to tell anyone about wiki withdrawals, not wanting to remain attached to an identity on[REDACTED] , wanting to help a friend with an article, etc.)

But I came to ask an administrative question: are you allowed to protect my talk page for a week, say, so that I can "get away" from it? I am referring to User talk:Outriggr, and I confirmed in my last edit using that account that the account I am posting under now is 'me'. If you are able to, I'd first like to put the page in a neutral archived state before you do so. Miniature drama queen signing off, Outrigger (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha. I keep putting up that bloody wikibreak notice, and then never actually manage to get away. Moni's words are very wise. Just take a break for a while, take the dogriggr out on his dates, catch the game and spend a few evenings at seedy bars checking out the new bands. (Not sure which is more important, the seediness of the bar or the quality of the band, but either way the result is the same. I love it when my ears are still ringing two hours later.) Archive your page, go ahead; don't think I can really lock it down, but I will keep an eye. We'll be waiting when you're ready to return. Believe me, I know how hard it is to walk away, even for a while. The email addy still works, feel free to use it.  :-) Risker (talk) 03:10, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Check out the new bands. That's good advice. I haven't done that in a while. I love it when you find some band you've never heard of before and just have a really enjoyable night. Jazz is always a sure hit, but every once in a while some rock band makes the night. Cheers, Varks Spira (talk) 03:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

To the Arbcom

I have no idea where to place this, as I have never brought a case or made an official complaint (amazing that isn't it) - I normally solve my own problems, but in these days where no-one now knows what is right or wrong - and blocks are for any length of time depending on the whim of the moment completely independant of the crime. Would one of you please look at Mattisse and her mentors (I am told you have passed some resolution concerning her) I am sick of the trolling against me on her page by her and her so called mentors. I avoid her and them as often as possible, but that seems to be no impediment to their continual sniping. Perhaps, it's time for a change of gaoler. Please post this wherever it is supposed to go. Giano (talk) 19:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Her mentors have reverted my reply on her talk - so here is my mesage to them, where they cannot revert. . I wish to have no contact with Mattisse or them. There is little to choose between them. Giano (talk) 19:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light

Risker: I would appreciate if you would change your close down of discussion to begin at the end of my initial comment, which is pertinent and certainly not a violation of topic ban. This paragraph is significant in stating the full impact of the ban. The multiple back and forth following this initial comment is what should be hidden and closed down. Brews ohare (talk) 01:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

No. Your opinion, as well as that of just about everyone else who commented there, is well documented in the case itself (as well as several other places). It does not also need to be on the Arbitration Committee noticeboard talk page. I've shut that section down, in its entirety, because none of the participants were blameless, and that includes you. Risker (talk) 03:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

There are no suggestions of blame or controversy in my explanation of the ban, which simply places together various remarks from the Arbitrators and the statement of the ban in one place. Brews ohare (talk) 05:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Properly formatting citations in Misplaced Pages articles

Hello Risker: Can you please provide me with information about properly formatting citations in Misplaced Pages articles. I'm hoping to improve the citations in the article I started about the Oath Keepers. I've seen many different methods used and so I ask which method you think is appropriate for the Oath Keepers article and where are the instruction pages located? Thank you, Varks Spira (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Probably your best bet is to go to Misplaced Pages:Citation templates and use those templates; that is generally where I go and what I use. See also WP:CITE for the minimum amount of information that is sought for citations. Hope this is helpful. Risker (talk) 03:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Discussion of topic ban is an infraction of topic ban itself

Could you kindly clarify for me the basis for intrusion by Risker and further intrusion by MBisanz into the discussion of the ban itself as a violation of my topic ban against "physics-based topics, broadly construed"? I absolutely fail to grasp how a discussion of the ban implications and propriety constitutes a "physics-based topic". Moreover, the posting of the decision on my Talk page explicitly invites such discussion and provides a link to the location to post it.

I also have asked Hersfold for clarification. Brews ohare (talk) 17:28, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I will not be responding to this tonight; perhaps tomorrow night. In the interim, Brews ohare, I suggest that you have an evening or two off and think about why it is you are so determined to continue arguing; after all, that is a major part of why you were topic banned and placed under general sanctions in the first place. Misplaced Pages is not a free speech zone, and you're not listening very effectively. Risker (talk) 21:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

It is difficult to listen when discussion I'm trying to listen to (namely, how to interpret a poorly phrased ban) has been blocked by a preemptive action to prevent imagined events that might occur. Brews ohare (talk) 14:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Arbcom Charts

Per our conversation, I got brave and tackled the arbcom charts - {{ArbitrationCommitteeChartRecent}} and {{ArbitrationCommitteeChart}}. The only change was adding the election link and moving John Vandenberg from Alpha to Beta. It shows up OK to me, but please let me know if I screwed it up! Thanks, UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 20:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me, thanks Ultraexactzz! Risker (talk) 20:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

John W. Stephens

It's not perfect yet, but I felt it was ready for the mainspace. Do you know of someone who might take a look at what categories Stephens might fit in? I'm not even certain where to start in these regards. Thanks for your previous help with C/E and the suggestions on citation templates. I learn something new every day! :) UA 21:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. You might want to try a wikiproject for the state or look at what categories a current senator from that state has; I'm pretty hopeless with categories myself, and depend upon the kindness of strangers to take care of that. Glad I was able to help. I agree, it's ready for mainspace. Risker (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I have already placed it in the NC wikiproject. I'll see if I can find some notable state senators to check. UA 21:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Since I visited Risker's talk page, I added categories to this. One may still be needed re military service if it's notable to his life. DOGRIGGR (deflea) 08:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Franamax RfA

So, what time is good? I realize you're quite busy, but I really think this thing should happen already. ceranthor 21:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh leave me alone, there's so many other interesting things to do here. :) I'll tell you, next Sunday - whether I'm ready or not. That clears a personal gap upcoming at end of the week and leaves me free time to deal with an RFA. I was hoping to dither for an extra few days, but there ya go. :) Franamax (talk) 22:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. If you need a co-nom, ping me at my talk page. I'll be busy only with an FAC. Put some ice on your ears, Franamax. ;) ceranthor 22:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Works for me, folks. I've got a few significant events happening in RL this week, but should be ready to roll on Sunday. I assume you'd prefer not to do it before dawn, Franamax? Say noonish your time, so you're around for the first 200 or so questions? ;-) Risker (talk) 22:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

More like 20. :P ceranthor 22:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait, there's going to be questions? Can't I just give you my account password and a link to {{I'm-right-you're-wrong}}? This whole thing smacks of effort. (I was trying to find the right Simpsons episode to link that to, but I see I'm already edit-conflicted here, so forget that). :) Franamax (talk) 22:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Addendum

Perhaps what was most distressful about your suggestion, Risker, was that I had the option to not be open about the trip and how it came about. I chose openness so that people could judge if there was bias. How else did I deal with it? I essentially wrote a series of article that were thematic about what it was like to be on a press junket. The lead article was entitled "The Holy Land Has an Image Problem" and was about their efforts to re-brand and market the country. I was the only reporter who raised this in my reporting, and I was definitely the only reporter to even mention the Palestinians in my stories. It's a shame when such openness is called into question, without actually discussing anything that was written itself, nor comparing it to the other stories that were were birthed from that trip in the mainstream media. I was treated no differently than any other reporter on that trip, except that I happened to get a scoop with the President (a source of extreme envy with the other reporters) because David Saranga was heavily into new media. And also: I was the only one who asked. -->David Shankbone 23:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

David, the fact that this article is about you, someone whom almost everyone who has commented has met, read, or otherwise come in contact with while volunteering here, makes it impossible for people to look at this article dispassionately. If it wasn't an article about you, I am quite certain that it would be much more negative than it is now, and a lot of active gatekeeping is happening to keep it in its current state. The problem, David, is that that trip is really all that you're notable about, and so it should be the focus of the article. The CJR piece would not be enough to write a Misplaced Pages article about you; if it was, then anyone who's been interviewed by a magazine ever would have an article about them.

This isn't about your journalistic integrity, or anyone else's. It's about a Misplaced Pages article on a guy whose claim to fame is associated with a low-readership website, and how easily the limited amount of publicly available, reliably sourced information about that guy could be twisted six ways to Sunday to emphasise whatever the article writer wants to focus on. The existence of this article actually justifies an article on that particular press junket. Wanna bet it doesn't turn into another Israel/Palestine derby? Risker (talk) 23:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I offer no opinion on my notability; I only offered one on my integrity. And I of course don't hold your opinions against you at all. They are well-reasoned, even if it is possible that they are not fully informed. -->David Shankbone 23:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, David. I do hope you can see that, regardless of your personal integrity on this matter, the way that trip is described in the sources is low fruit for anyone who wants to paint things differently. Certainly if there were reliable sources showing that well-known journalists writing for mainstream publications were in your shoes, this would receive significant play in their article. Incidentally, for the record, in the last six months, I've suppressed well over 300 edits that were direct attacks on either article subjects or editors, and I am not the busiest member of the Oversight team. I've already dealt with extreme vandalism related to you. I really don't want the volume to increase at all, either for you or any other subject or editor, but I'm afraid the opposite is going to happen here. Risker (talk) 23:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

One last point: that Columbia Journalism Review article wasn't about just an interview with Shimon Peres, it was about all my interviews, over 40. It quotes from the ones with Edmund White and Ingrid Newkirk. He gets quotes from Gay Talese and Augusten Burroughs. He mentions Vivien Goldman and Antje Duvekot. Eric Bogosian, Nadine Strossen (the President of the ACLU), Al Sharpton...rock stars, authors, activists. That was what the article was about. Not just Shimon Peres. That was what kicked the entire project up to be written about. -->David Shankbone 00:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Erm, no. I am well aware that the CJR article was broader-ranging. However, that article on its own would not be sufficient to write a WP article about you. It is the other sources in combination with that article that might make you notable enough for an article, and almost without exception, those other sources focus on the Peres interview or trip to Israel. I've unlinked all those names, for the record; I don't want my page to be showing up in "what links here" when I have never read most of those articles. I trust you'll understand. Risker (talk) 00:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries about de-linking. I wasn't offering that as evidence of notability, but only that the article be characterized accurately. It was about a larger project that I put a lot of time and effort into, including paying a transcriber because of the output (40 interviews in about four/five months). -->David Shankbone 00:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Quandry

Hi Risker, I have a quandary I'm hoping you may be able to give me some advice relating to the situation surrounding Mattisse at the moment. this edit is probably innocuous enough on the face of it, but it struck me as odd, in that the user appeared to have had little association with any of the users involved. The contribution history suggests an alternative account of some kind, and the reactions to my probing have been pretty evasive. (unsurprisingly - presumably also the innocent get their backs up when accused of wrongdoint). The difficulty is that a single edit like that carries a range of implication depending on who it is.

1. If it's Mattisse socking again, that's a serious matter.
2. If it's one of the mentors, then stacking a reaction like that is potentially disruptive, - someone would have to review the incident and the other edits of the account, and make a judgement on the severity.
3. If it is an unrelated and uninvolved user, it's probably not a big deal at all.

Should I file an SPI with just Mattisse named, or an SPI with Mattisse and all the mentors named too, or drop the matter as it's an isolated incident? --Joopercoopers (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)