Jump to content

User talk:Matt Crypto/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

WP:ENGVAR

I have stamped out numerous non-GB spellings in Industrialisation per WP:ENGVAR. Did I miss any? Edison (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Featured article review of Caesar cipher

Caesar cipher has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thanks, Cumulus Clouds (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


Discussion regarding Early computers task force

Discussion regarding Early computers task force can be found here -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Maurog

Please either unblock or ask for review of this block. Calling it trolling in your edit summary doesn't automatically make it so, and I don't see that they received any warnings on their talk page. --Onorem♠Dil 18:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It's been reviewed by another admin, and I'm perfectly happy with the block. The guy is evidently not editing in good faith, right? He's claiming he has faith in, um, a flying spaghetti monster... — Matt Crypto 19:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
And? Yeah, it's silly, but it's not blatantly offensive or anything...and while the "faith" part of his comment may have been trolling, other parts were relevant to the conversation. A warning or at least a block notice would have been appropriate. --Onorem♠Dil 19:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm quite happy with people being silly, but there's a difference between making a joke, and acting out a parody in a context where it's just disruptive and a waste of other people's time. I think it's appropriate to send a message that it's not going to be tolerated indefinitely (whether the message will get through or not is unclear, given that he's now claiming "religious persecution"...) — Matt Crypto 19:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I think a message to that effect on the user's talk page, along with a note that you would block if the behavior continued, would have done the same job. I strongly disagree with blocking without warning except in cases of blatant disruption, but I don't care enough to argue about it, and like you said, it's been reviewed by another admin now. --Onorem♠Dil 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reminding me once again that Wikipedia admins think the rules are written for everyone but themselves. If I thought you people have any shame, I'd tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself. • Maurog • 23:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. — Matt Crypto 09:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Salaam

Salam nyingi kutoka Dar es Salaam! Jamani Matt, hujambo? Nafurahia kuona umerudi tena katika Wikipedia, ingawaje umetutupa sie Waswahili! Je,basi huna hata dakika mbili - moja za kuweza kututembelea na sisi Waswahili katika Wikipedia kwa Kiswahili? Zilikuwa salam za kukutakia kheri na maisha mema!!!--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 15:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Ajtai-Dwork cryptosystem

A request. Zahd (talk) 04:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 29 14 July 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor: Transparency 
WikiWorld: "Goregrind" Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 4, Issue 30 21 July 2008 About the Signpost
WikiWorld: "Cartoon physics" News and notes: New Board Chair, compromised accounts 
Dispatches: History of the featured article process Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Skull of Mkwawa

Hi, Matt. I have an notice. Today, I uploaded image:Skull of Mkwawa.jpg to Commons. Because I translated Chief Mkwawa to Japanese and I'd like to use that image on jawp.
Thank you for your uploading and sorry for my broken English. Regards.--Backblow (talk) 09:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblockrequest

Dear Matt,

I'm an academic and 'real name user' who has been blocked as a 'sockpuppet' of Wikigiraffes who uses the same computer as me. I have made all the usual requests to be unblocked, plus had long email exchanges about it with SlimVirgin and Jimbo, both of whom have been 'evasive', always promising to 'look into it' ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AWikigiraffes&year=&month=-1

It really is very suspicious!

Wikigiraffes is accused of many terrible things but in fact, was blocked for posting a critique from a blog of a journalist as part of a userpage debate over whether or not that journalists's page (started by SlimVirgin) should contain any critical content.

I would like to ask you to review the vindictive block applied by SlimVirgin to my friend Wikigiraffes, and then perhaps review my one too as Wikigiraffes ' sockpuppet'.

Please email if you like to know any more. 90.62.148.67 (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC) (doc=martin=cohen)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 37 15 September 2008 About the Signpost
Wikiquote checkuser found to be sockpuppeteer WikiWorld: "Ubbi dubbi" 
News and notes: Wikis Takes Manhattan, milestones Dispatches: Interview with Ruhrfisch, master of Peer review 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Reward for African country editing

Hi, I was wondering as a part of the reward board offering if you could please copyedit Burundi. I am trying to get this article to GA status. Any extra advice will help. Thanks. miranda 06:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Virgil Exner

Hi, as a previous contributor, pls check out my enquiry at Talk:Virgil Exner#Design work. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 05:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Domestic discipline

I have nominated Domestic discipline, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domestic discipline. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. VG ☎ 01:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Matt,

It's been a while, everything ok? I recently visited the Enigma page and saw that many of the External links were removed. Not only these of my (non-commercial non-advertising non-selling) website , but alse great links to pages as Paul Reuver's RISC Enigma sims, or Frode Weieruds pages on breaking Wehrmacht Ciphers and the CSG simulators. They have replaced the links with some external list, i don't know what it is. It seems that they have 'trown away the baby with the water' as they say in our region. Of course, there were some commercial links or links to really bad software, but did all have to go???

Could you visit the Enigma discussion page (topic adding/removing links) Apparently a guy called Chris Cunningham has removed the links and replaced them by some sort of list. Like to get your opinion at the discussion page. Regards, Dirk Rijmenants Dirk (talk) 00:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Matt, never mind, links can be changed and added. Has been resolved. Regards,Dirk (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Whitecross

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Whitecross, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bongomatic 13:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Reference Desk cypher question

This ref desk question Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#Which Cypher is This? seems particularly suited to your interests and capabilities. Is there any hope for a solution? The sample text seems too short, unless "Death" were a setting for some known cypher. Thanks. Edison (talk) 05:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 42 8 November 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor 
News and notes: The Price is Right, milestones Dispatches: Halloween Main Page contest generates new article content 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 4, Issue 43 10 November 2008 About the Signpost
Fundraiser opens: Over $500,000 raised in first week ArbCom elections: Nominations open 
Book review: How Wikipedia Works MediaWiki search engine improved 
Four Board resolutions, including financials, approved News and notes: Vietnamese Wiki Day 
Dispatches: Historic election proves groundbreaking on the Main Page Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 44 17 November 2008 About the Signpost
Lawsuit briefly shuts down Wikipedia.de GFDL 1.3 released, will allow Wikimedia migration to Creative Commons license 
Wikimedia Events Roundup News and notes: Fundraiser, List Summary Service, milestones 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Death to crypto navboxes!

I'd be interested in your opinion on my proposal to remove all crypto navboxes, here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cryptography#Proposal: remove all crypto navboxes -- ciphergoth (talk) 14:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.


The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 45 24 November 2008 About the Signpost
From the editor: 200th issue 
ArbCom elections: Candidate profiles News and notes: Fundraiser, milestones 
Wikipedia in the news Dispatches: Featured article writers — the inside view 
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Volume 4, Issue 46 1 December 2008 About the Signpost
ArbCom elections: Elections open Wikipedia in the news 
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System Features and admins 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 5, Issue 1 3 January 2009 About the Signpost
From the editor: Getting back on track 
ArbCom elections: 10 arbitrators appointed Virgin Killer page blocked, unblocked in UK 
Editing statistics show decline in participation Wikipedia drug coverage compared to Medscape, found wanting 
News and notes: Fundraising success and other developments Dispatches: Featured list writers 
Wikipedia in the news WikiProject Report: WikiProject Ice Hockey 
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:FEAL-round.png

Image:FEAL-round.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:FEAL InfoBox Diagram.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:FEAL InfoBox Diagram.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:RC2-mix.png is now available as Commons:Image:RC2 InfoBox Diagram.png. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
File:M-209.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Hagelin M-209.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 3 17 January 2009 About the Signpost
News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom Wikipedia in the news 
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

The Signpost
Volume 5, Issue 7
Weekly Delivery
2009-02-16

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist.
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 16:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Enigma machine FAR

I have nominated Enigma machine for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt (talk) 07:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

James Crosby

You correctly removed the word disgraced from this BLP. Are you happy about the comment in the talk page? Baron Myners is another such. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Clarification on a block

You blocked User talk:Garygateaux for abusing mutliple accounts, but failed to name those accounts which are his multiples. These people always request an unblock and always profess their innocence, and it would be easier if you linked to the obvious evidence which I am sure exists to tie him to some other accounts. Please advise so that I can decline his latest unblock request. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

In all probability User:Babylon93 (see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Babylon93). — Matt Crypto 17:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Request that you unblock User:Garygateaux on the basis of his last edit. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Fravia

Hello, could you please unprotect the article Fravia so that a rewrite can be done? I know it was given an AfD which resulted in a redirect, but the reason for that AfD was that the article was poorly written, which can be solved by a rewrite. Thanks! Ooseaway (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I came here for the same reason, but Ooseaway has been quicker than me. Zorbid (talk) 15:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, it's already been unprotected by User:Evercat. — Matt Crypto 16:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Fravia

It was rightfully redirected after AfD. Now the same IPs and disruptive users are back and putting garbage into the article. What am I supposed to do? Enigmamsg 00:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Source of disruption. Currently, the article contains a giant image, two out of five references being fravia.com and "that friend was me" and trash such as

"Over the many years of his internet presence, Fravia was able to build a notable community of really smart people. He guided them, provided information, collected their works. He was always available for help and critical comments.

A countless number of brilliant people have been involved over the years attracted by the great wealth of knowledge that was available on the fravia website. In the beginning, these people were mostly interested in software reversing and in software protection, but gradually he was able to expand the context to critical thinking, reality cracking and knowledge management.

Only a very small part of the people who was accessing his pages actively contributed to the website. Nevertheless, many were the contributions.(some info about contributors countries and web site statistics could fit nicely here. can you provide them DQ?)"

This does not belong on Wikipedia and there's an AfD to back that up. The current version is quite possibly worse than the version that existed when it was originally sent to AfD in the first place. Enigmamsg 00:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
it wasn't rightfully redirected; something like 4 ppl voted on that issue. It never occured to me that some one would delete the page, if it had I would have visited more often and explained the importance of the page and also done touch up work to make it more acceptable.
The source of the "disruption" is here, Fravia recently passed away; a lot of people are now coming to WP to read about his life in a single page only to find that there isn't any coverage of him. The reason WP members are having such a great difficulty in fixing the page is that they are new to the WP and unaccustomed to the way of things here, they are filled with emotion and POV given the fact that a very great man has died recently, and Fravia was a member of a scene that didn't get any media coverage due to misc. controvercies and the personal nature of the reversing scene. I can assure you, searchlores.org (Fravia.com) ironically, is one of the most credible places to find information on the topic of advanced internet searching and enlightened software concepts. If you know of a site with greater credibility in the field, PLZ make mention of this in the discussion section so we can contact them and request that they do a story on the man's life. You, I have to say, are not doing a very job of criticising the members of this site frequenting that page you're in contest with and it is exacerbating matters. This will not go away with mindless blanking of the page, it's just going to frustrate members and result in a waste of everyone's time.Xetxo (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies. Perhaps you are not aware of what AfDs are. Also, please assume good faith. If he's a "very great man", then there should be no trouble finding reliable sources discussing him. If he didn't get coverage, then perhaps he is not notable by Wikipedia's definition of the term. As for the site's credibility, I don't know or care. I was simply linking to where the troublesome edits originated from. Enigmamsg 05:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Ubuntu

You may want to be aware of Talk:Ubuntu#RFC: Where should the redirect point?. Better and quantified arguments are being made in support of the philosophy. Yworo (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


Shaun Wylie

I suggest you have a *pint* for him. Died Friday, according to the Bletchley Park twitter feed. (How's that for pushing the definition of "reliable source".) - David Gerard (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Andy McNab

Your recent edit comment does not really address the issue of why my edit is not acceptable in an article predominantly sourced from two websites of equal (or perhaps less) verifiability than my source. I'm not for a minute suggesting that the website in question is in the same league as print media, but it is certainly in the same league as www.greymansland.com or www.andmcnab.co.uk. What's the story? 121.219.155.85 (talk) 11:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I have no comment on those other two websites, but the claim is about the identity of a living person for whom the revelation of his identity may (nor may not) have relevance to his personal security. The sources used, therefore, have to be beyond reproach. — Matt Crypto 12:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

www.andymcnab.co.uk is McNabs official (and therefor approved by author) website. Greymansland is a fansite with no links to McNab, hence not valid when it comes verifiability. Therealistbravotwozero website was created by an enthusiastic wiki contributor, who saw valid verifiability fail on wiki (hence his information was removed), so then created a website to make the same information verifiable. That would be the same as saying "Hitler was born as a woman" and then create a website saying that exact same thing and then say it must be real because it is on my website. I think not. So in my opinion: McNab's official website is a reliable source, Greymansland and The realist are not. 206.122.102.52 (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

As the anon says. See also Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Using_the_subject_as_a_self-published_source and WP:SELFPUB. — Matt Crypto 12:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
right, that is a much shorter way of saying what I meant to say ;-) 206.122.102.52 (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WRCryptoSurvey

Template:WRCryptoSurvey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Data encryption standard FAR

Hi Matt I have nominated Data Encryption Standard for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Kiswahili Wikipedia Challenge

Come check out what's happening on the swahili wiki... we have 800 registrants for a winter article-writing contest! They need help registering accounts, though. Also, Mr Accountable is doing some amazing things with topic-specific scripted article creation. Warmly, +sj+ 01:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

Falsification of sources

Please do not introduce material into articles that misrepresents cited sources, as you did with Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. The issue you raised has been discussed at length on the talk page. If you continue to disrupt the article you may find yourself being blocked. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Edit Warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Hipocrite (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Matt Crypto! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Malcolm J. Williamson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

Problems with Category Definitions and Wikipedia Admins' move to delete

Hi Matt

I'm in the process of rewriting and extending the Dorabella Cipher article to include a deeper discussion of the cipher and related symbols (such as the probable visual mnemonics or "hairy footballs" that appear on the same page of the exercise book as the full symbol set and a mapping to a reduced alphabet) and the Liszt fragment. I'm also trying to address concerns about the article's lack of encyclopedic tone.

This work is being undertaken with the support of the director of the Eric Sams Study Centre in Italy (www.ericsams.org) since some of Eric's as yet unpublished work contains materials that are relevant.

Since this is going to be a slow process I have set up a sandbox under my user page and copied the current article there, and bit by bit I'm working on it (as and when I can). Once it's finished I'll replace the existing article wholesale.

To that end I created and uploaded to Wikimedia some stylized graphics of both the visual mnemonics and a table of one mapping of the cipher (as depicted by Elgar's own exercise book page) and attempted to categorize them, with some advice from the Help desk there.

I'm tripping over a problem with a couple of Wikipedia admins who don't know the cipher and who don't seem to be able to understand some of the issues (or rather, I don't seem to be able to find an explanation that works for them). The current discussion is here: the discussion page

I'm trying to replicate in Wikipedia the category hierarchy that I created in Wikimedia, for consistency.

I don't know whether you would feel disposed to support keeping the category Cipher-Related Symbols to cover the visual mnemonics (the hairy footballs that are not cipher symbols per se but are related to the cipher). I'd be grateful for your thoughts.

The category hierarchy is: History of cryptography | Uncracked codes and ciphers | Dorabella Cipher | Cipher-Related Symbols. The first three categories already exist on Wikipedia.

My argument is that the mnemonics belong in the Cipher-Related Symbols category, not the Dorabella Cipher category, since they are not part of the cipher but are related to it.

Kind regards, AncientBrit (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

CfD nomination of Category:GCHQ

I have nominated Category:GCHQ (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

Your DES image

I find your image File:Data Encryption Standard InfoBox Diagram.png a little bit confusing. At first sight it looks that "Half block (32 bits)" and "Subkey (48 bit)" are XOR-ed together. The image doesn't say anything about "E". Maybe it is better to write "Expansion (48 Bits)". This is IMHO more clear. What do you think about? --qbi (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

Thanks re: Enigma (machine) comment

Thanks, Matt for your remarks. I am, actually British and have two good friends who worked on the Ferranti Mark 1. I am concerned that there is accuracy and balance in articles about Enigma, its decryption, Alan Turing and early computers. --TedColes (talk) 10:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

Thank you for uploading File:Tunny-wheels.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:CRAY.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:CRAY.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tunny-wheels.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tunny-wheels.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 02:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

File source problem with File:Ggg.png

Thank you for uploading File:Ggg.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

Lorenz SZ42 photos

Matt, I am updating the Lorenz cipher article and wonder whether you have a version of your Wikimedia Commons photo 'SZ42-6-wheels.jpg' that could be used to illustrate how the pins (cams) on the wheels work. When I look at your photo full-screen, I can see how the pins work on the wheels nearest to the camera. If you have a higher resolution version of this photo, would it be possible to 'zoom in' on the two wheels nearest but two to the camera (2 and 3) at the point where the light is reflecting, and put the resultant picture on Wikimedia Commons? --TedColes (talk) 15:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the current is at the original resolution, I'm afraid -- sorry! — Matt Crypto 16:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

sw:wp

Hi Matt. You may be interested to know that at the Swahili wikipedia, there is currently a discussion going on about removing admins who haven't contributed in a long time (cf. http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi#Kuondoa_wakabidhi_ambao_hawakushiriki_tena_tangu_miezi_kumi_au_zaidi). You may want to consider shortening that process by requesting the removal of your admin status yourself here. Of course, you'd be even more welcome to contribute to sw:wp again. Karibu sana! --Baba Tabita (talk) 20:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

File permission problem with File:Enigma-machine.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Enigma-machine.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 07:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Simpledevices.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Simpledevices.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 07:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Reciprocal-operation.png

Thanks for uploading File:Reciprocal-operation.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 07:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Moving Press-up to "Push-up"

As a user who has participated in move discussions for the article Press-up, I invite you to weigh in on the move discussion currently under way: Talk:Press-up#Requested_move_2. -Clconway (talk) 01:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

Reference to Kahn, 1991

Matt, I see you made reference in Government Communications Headquarters to Kahn, 1991 [1] but the full refenence is missing. By analogy with your edits to Enigma machine [2] where you later added the full reference [3], I have done the same for the GCHQ article [4]. However, I do not have access to the book, which relates to WWII, and the GCHQ reference relates to GCCS in WWI so there might be a very slight doubt. Please correct me or revert me if need be. 2006 seems a long time ago! Thincat (talk) 10:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Cryptography FAR

I have nominated Cryptography for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.Smallman12q (talk) 14:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Feistel's Scientific American article 1973

The Feistel's Scientific American article 1973 does not appear to describe the details of the cipher called Lucifer (cipher) that would allow to deduce the key length. The figures show 5 layers of 4-bit S-box pairs selected by one key bit each. For 128 bit cipher that would mean 160 key bits are needed to select the S-boxes. In Feistel's '359 patent the key bits used to select the S-boxes are generated from a 48-bit key using LFSR's and delivered by a device called bit effect router. It is very unlikely that the key in that system would have been 128-bits, but more like 48-bits. Lauri.pirttiaho (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Fred Goodwin - is he a Banker.

Even Fred Goodwin seems to disagree with those who consider him to be a banker. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/10/fred-goodwin-superinjunction-banking) I hope this will help you to learn that you should not involve yourself in matters of which you have no experience. Have you ever worked for an investment bank ? Let the people who know about these matters make the judgements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.165.171 (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Er...this is about some discussion from a couple of years ago, right? Got to love Wikipedia for those people who care "just a little too much" about winning an argument... ;-) — Matt Crypto 10:13, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

A rare 8-rotor printing Enigma

The photograph taken by Eric Tischer in Budapest in 2005 with the above caption in the Enigma machine article, shows a rotor cipher machine, but are you sure that it really is an Enigma? It differs sunstantially from the other machines from the Enigma company and I can't see an Enigma label in the picture. --TedColes (talk) 06:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

It's possible: http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/enigma/h/index.htm — Matt Crypto 08:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

"Rex" in his own mind only

I only recently came across Rex Curry and read your long-past run-in with him with great amusement. It has been a long time since I've run across "scholarship" as bogus as his, and given my sphere of historical interests, that's saying quite a lot. Best! PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 19:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

Church on the Rock-International

Can you help improve the article for Church on the Rock- International? There is plenty of information out there, but I need help cleaning up the article and finding more sources. Thanks.Theseus1776 (talk) 19:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


The Signpost: 3 October 2011

File:Ggg.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ggg.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Techtri (talk) 14:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

The Signpost: 7 November2011

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011


Something you might find interesting

Please see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#How would the 8 rotor Enigma machine have changed WWII?. Would more rotors have increased the decryption time so much that useful intel would not have been obtained in time to have any effect? Regards. Edison (talk) 03:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Marian Rejewski and citations

There are some unreferenced paragraphs. Could you add citations to them? I am afraid that otherwise the article will be defe atured during next Featured Articles review pass. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 03:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

I have added you to missing Wikipedians

Just to let you know (I am supposed to - this is what it says). Ottawahitech (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 05:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. WilliamH (talk) 17:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

Non-free rationale for File:Zygalski-rozycki-rejewski.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Zygalski-rozycki-rejewski.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

Notice of change

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

File:DiegoGarcia2.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Swahili article requests

Matt,

Do you do article requests in Swahili for the Swahili Wikipedia?

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 03:46, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

adding public key

Many users will post there PGP public key to there user page so that people can securely contact them. Will you be adding one to your user page?

For example here is my PGP public key, and how it looks on my page.Thea10 (talk) 05:56, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

My PGP public key ID is 0x2aa6163496d08df1, expand for key:
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Darwin)
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=1Qm4
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

File permission problem with File:Simpledevices.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Simpledevices.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Reciprocal-operation.png

Thanks for uploading File:Reciprocal-operation.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tunny-wheels.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tunny-wheels.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SekretEnigmyRejewski.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SekretEnigmyRejewski.jpg. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 23:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CryptographyReader

Template:CryptographyReader has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DexDor (talk) 06:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

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) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cryptographic key

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Atlantic306 (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

File:Bombe-menu.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bombe-menu.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

ATTENTION: This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of AutoKey for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AutoKey is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AutoKey until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Penance (Final Fantasy X) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Penance (Final Fantasy X). Since you had some involvement with the Penance (Final Fantasy X) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:57, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Featured article review of ROT13

I have nominated ROT13 for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 01:18, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:People associated with Bletchley Park has been nominated for discussion

Category:People associated with Bletchley Park, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Post-It™ note listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Post-It™ note. Since you had some involvement with the Post-It™ note redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Cryptography

Portal:Cryptography, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cryptography and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Cryptography during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Guilherme Burn (talk) 14:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ross-Anderson.gif

Notice

The file File:Ross-Anderson.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:DiegoGarcia2.png

Notice

The file File:DiegoGarcia2.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cryptography newsgroups

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cryptography newsgroups requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Stowgull (talk) 22:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Portex

Notice

The article Portex has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Caesar cipher

I have nominated Caesar cipher for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 00:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

"SCREAM (cipher)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect SCREAM (cipher) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 16 § SCREAM (cipher) until a consensus is reached. Dimawik (talk) 19:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Dh-mockup.png

Notice

The file File:Dh-mockup.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned file which is not likely to be useful.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 12:42, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

"Sickies" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Sickies has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23 § Sickies until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Matt_Crypto/Archive_1&oldid=1176487992"