User talk:Bearian/ArchivesMar2013

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bearian. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Alcohol laws of New Jersey

Bearian, I need someone with a legal background to review alcohol laws of New Jersey, particularly the latter part of the article which is very legalistic. Another editor and I have spent an extensive amount of time editting it, and it is now a featured article candidate. Thank you for any help that you can provide. DavidinNJ (talk) 04:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, later in the week? Bearian (talk) 19:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

That works. Thank you very much. DavidinNJ (talk) 20:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Alcohol laws of New Jersey's talk page.
Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Alcohol laws of New Jersey's talk page. #2
Hello. You have a new message at Talk:Alcohol laws of New Jersey's talk page. #3

The Signpost: 04 March 2013

Op-ed: We must do more to turn readers into editors

News and notes: Outing of editor causes firestorm

Featured content: Slow week for featured content

WikiProject report: WikiProject Television Stations

The Signpost: 11 March 2013

From the editor: Signpost–Wikizine merger

News and notes: Finance committee updates

Featured content: Batman, three birds and a Mercedes

Arbitration report: Doncram case closes; arbitrator resigns

WikiProject report: Setting a precedent

Technology report: Article Feedback reversal

Salutations

Thank you Bearian for the kitten! I'm more of a occasional wikipedian who likes to jump in to well heated debates. JamboQueen (talk) 17:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Pope Francis I

Hello! I noticed that you acted on a CSD G6-based speedy deletion request. The article's move to this title had been proposed on the talk page (with multiple editors expressing opposition). I have no opinion on which title should be used, but I wanted to point out that the move wasn't uncontroversial (and the speedy deletion enabled circumvention of the correct process). Thanks! —David Levy 19:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

True, but I think this was an exigent circumstance. Slap me with a trout if I'm wrong. Bearian (talk) 19:56, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I commented on the talk page about this. Bearian (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You've written that you "thought this move would be non-controversial". Given the fact that multiple editors had expressed opposition, why did you think that? —David Levy 20:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I assumed good faith on the part of the nom. Bearian (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Editors acting in good faith can be mistaken. (In this instance, Marek69 probably was unaware of the discussion.) Are you saying that you didn't check the article's talk page? —David Levy 20:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

No, that would require a higher standard of care than necessary under what I saw and knew at the time. I know and trust User:Marek69, who's been editing for 5 years, and I have interacted with him frequently. Again, if you think I did something careless, trout me and move on. Bearian (talk) 20:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I did anything wrong, but when I googled, most reliable sources were referring to the pope as Francis I, including the pope himself in his Jorge M Bergoglio twitter account: @JMBergoglio tweet: 'Inmensamente feliz de ser el nuevo Papa, Francisco I' which translates as 'Immensely happy to be the new Pope, Francis I' -- Marek.69^talk 20:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I was acting upon this request, so I may have goofed as well. Mea culpa. Bearian (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Which title is correct is immaterial. Either way, the matter is controversial. CSD G6 is applicable to uncontroversial moves. (I assume that you were unaware of the debate and had no intention of circumventing it.) —David Levy 21:24, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Excepting the most obvious cases (such as those involving vandalism or typos), I disagree that it's appropriate for an administrator to assume that a desired move is uncontroversial without checking its talk page. I'm not questioning Marek69's integrity or asserting that you had any reason to, but admins are held to a higher standard of care (particularly in areas involving sysop tools). So please be more careful in the future, particularly when dealing with high-profile articles currently undergoing rapid editing.

My intent was to bring the oversight to your attention. I have no desire to scold you with a fish image. —David Levy 21:24, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I have now struck part of my comment above as I have now been informed by a number of Wikipedians that it is a fake tweet. --- I would like to apologise again for any trouble I have caused. You are correct in assuming that I was unaware that there was a debate on the talk page (it was only about 10-15 minutes after the announcement, and the last time I looked at the talk page there was nothing on it!) I certainly had no intention of circumventing any rules deliberately. Please accept this as a good faith edit by someone trying to help and improve (not disrupt) the project. -- Marek.69^talk 22:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't doubt that both Bearian and you have acted entirely in good faith, with no goal apart from the project's betterment. —David Levy 22:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. The traffic was crazy today, see [File:Habemus-papam-2013-reqstats-daily.png], so I had to make a quick decision. As it turns out, I was perhaps right for the wrong reason. Bearian (talk) 22:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Barnstars thanks

Wow ... two barnstars for work on the same article! Thanks! I do appreciate it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Beer Barnstar

		The Beer Barnstar
		This is in appreciation for your editting of alcohol laws of New Jersey, which will hopefully soon be a feature article. I particularly liked the photo of Feigenspan's Brewery. DavidinNJ (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I had to add that one! Thank you for the barnstar. Bearian (talk) 18:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2013

News and notes: Resigning arbitrator slams Committee

WikiProject report: Making music

Interview: Meeting in the middle: Wikipedia and libraries

Featured content: Wikipedia stays warm

Arbitration report: Richard case closes

Technology report: Visual Editor "on schedule"

Marnell Corrao Associates

Any reason to think it is not notable? A simple Google search gets over 15,000 hits and they are a significant firm in the casino industry. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Note to self: see discussion on that user's page. Bearian (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

WikiProject report: The 'Burgh: WikiProject Pittsburgh

Featured content: One and a half soursops

Arbitration report: Two open cases

News and notes: Sue Gardner to leave WMF; German Wikipedians spearhead another effort to close Wikinews

Technology report: The Visual Editor: Where are we now, and where are we headed?

Recent research: "Ignore all rules" in deletions; anonymity and groupthink; how readers react when shown talk pages

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Curtilage, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blackstone (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) 19:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)