| Revision as of 19:43, 21 May 2012 editArcandam (talk | contribs)10,103 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:51, 21 May 2012 edit undoArcandam (talk | contribs)10,103 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| I guess you are one of the nutters who edit wikipedia and fill it with junk <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | I guess you are one of the nutters who edit wikipedia and fill it with junk <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :I have linked those two edits above. Which part of those edits contains ]? Another user (named Toddy1) has reverted the edits you are talking about. Check the . ] (]) 10:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC) | :I have linked those two edits above. Which part of those edits contains ]? Another user (named Toddy1) has reverted the edits you are talking about. Check the . ] (]) 10:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ==New Pages update== | |||
| Hey {{PAGENAME}} :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As ], the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on. | |||
| On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our ] on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :). | |||
| On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup ]. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the ] or ]. Thanks! ] (]) 23:39, 5 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ==New Page Triage prototype released== | |||
| Hey Arcandam! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! ] (]) 03:48, 13 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Your post on my talk page == | == Your post on my talk page == | ||
| Line 63: | Line 53: | ||
| :Oh, no worries. He seems to have changed his opinion, . Yes, I know, different username, but it is the . ] (]) 22:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | :Oh, no worries. He seems to have changed his opinion, . Yes, I know, different username, but it is the . ] (]) 22:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::Glad to see all the help you are offering him. I like the bit about 'magic'. ] (]) 06:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC) | ::Glad to see all the help you are offering him. I like the bit about 'magic'. ] (]) 06:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ==Talkback== | |||
| {{talkback|Ged UK|Unprotect|ts=19:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)}} | |||
| ]] 19:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:51, 21 May 2012
Reflinks bug
This bug is caused by Reflinks (the latest version). "Meld je aan of registreer je om een reactie te plaatsen!" is Dutch and means "Login or register to comment". 
Fixed Arcandam (talk) 01:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
User page redirect
Hey, Arcandam,I noticed your userpage redirects to an article with the same title as your username. I'm just notifying you that per Misplaced Pages:User pages#Categories.2C templates.2C and redirects, user pages should not redirect to anything other than your talk page. Happy editing! Shuipzv3 (talk) 05:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I think you've misread that sentence. Quote (emphasis mine): "User talk pages should not redirect to anything other than the talk page of another account controlled by the same user.". Arcandam (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Facepalm , sorry for bothering you. Keep up your good work with correcting the citing mistakes. Shuipzv3 (talk) 05:32, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Arcandam (talk) 05:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, a few citations from WP:USERPAGE:
If you prefer to put nothing here then you can redirect it to your user talk page for the convenience of other editors.
Details about yourself should not normally go in the main encyclopedia namespace (reserved for encyclopedia articles only), and encyclopedia articles should never link to any userspace pages.
Inappropriate internal or external links that unexpectedly direct the reader to unreasonable locations or violate prohibitions on linking may also be removed or remedied by any user.
Creating a user page is optional. If you do not wish to put anything there, you can redirect it to your talk page, so that anyone visiting it will be sent there instead.
Believe me, you should change the redirekt. --Ben Ben (talk) 17:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Why? Arcandam (talk) 19:12, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- The most useful reason is that when I click on your username in your signature I'm looking to see information on you. Not only what you might have on your userpage, but your contributions / block log / etc. As it sits, I end up at the article and sit there for a moment going 'Uhh why do I not see user contributions in the toolbar?'. You're perfectly welcome to keep the link to the article, but the redirect is confusing. Syrthiss (talk) 12:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, that is something I can understand. I think I have a solution but it means breaking the license; copying the content of the article. Arcandam (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, historically I don't recall that kind of action having a favorable conclusion. WP:FAKEARTICLE I think is what people cite when that happens. You could probably get by with limited information from the article, but a full cut-and-paste wouldn't be warranted. If I had to choose between the redirect and this, I'd say keep the redirect. Syrthiss (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ok. For now I will keep the redirect. Arcandam (talk) 12:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Update: I tried it differently. I have used {{userpage}} to avoid WP:FAKEARTICLE problems. Arcandam (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ok. For now I will keep the redirect. Arcandam (talk) 12:43, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, historically I don't recall that kind of action having a favorable conclusion. WP:FAKEARTICLE I think is what people cite when that happens. You could probably get by with limited information from the article, but a full cut-and-paste wouldn't be warranted. If I had to choose between the redirect and this, I'd say keep the redirect. Syrthiss (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, that is something I can understand. I think I have a solution but it means breaking the license; copying the content of the article. Arcandam (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- The most useful reason is that when I click on your username in your signature I'm looking to see information on you. Not only what you might have on your userpage, but your contributions / block log / etc. As it sits, I end up at the article and sit there for a moment going 'Uhh why do I not see user contributions in the toolbar?'. You're perfectly welcome to keep the link to the article, but the redirect is confusing. Syrthiss (talk) 12:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| Good job reverting the vandalism here! Riley Huntley (talk) No talkback needed; I'll temporarily watch here. 01:16, 3 May 2012 (UTC) |
- Whoohoo! Thanks mate! Arcandam (talk) 01:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Putin
I was removing pov material. Misplaced Pages claims not to be a forum but your actions prove that it is a forum for idiots to speak rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.178.184 (talk) 09:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- The edits I reverted did not contain pov material. edit 1 & edit 2. Arcandam (talk) 09:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes they did. Also the talk page is for discussion on the article. It's not a forum for nutters to type rubbish.
I guess you are one of the nutters who edit wikipedia and fill it with junk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.178.184 (talk) 10:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- I have linked those two edits above. Which part of those edits contains POV? Another user (named Toddy1) has reverted the edits you are talking about. Check the history of the article. Arcandam (talk) 10:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Your post on my talk page
I was on a wikibreak but in any case don't want to get involved with the article right now. Dougweller (talk) 14:31, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, no worries. He seems to have changed his opinion, see here. Yes, I know, different username, but it is the same person. Arcandam (talk) 22:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Glad to see all the help you are offering him. I like the bit about 'magic'. Dougweller (talk) 06:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)