User talk:SlimVirgin/History 2: Difference between revisions

< User talk:SlimVirgin Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 01:47, 7 May 2006 editSlimVirgin (talk \| contribs)172,064 editsm Reverted edits by Ptmccain (talk) to last version by Homeontherange← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:43, 7 May 2006 edit undoZeq (talk \| contribs)10,670 edits Thank youNext edit →
Line 90:		Line 90:

	No. If you read the comments made on the 3RR page last week you'll see that, in fact, I was blocked for adding the same words more than three times. Your interpretation of the 3RR rule is overly broad and unique. ] 13:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)		No. If you read the comments made on the 3RR page last week you'll see that, in fact, I was blocked for adding the same words more than three times. Your interpretation of the 3RR rule is overly broad and unique. ] 13:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

			== Thank you ==

			Hi Slim,
			Thanks for your note. I understand.
			best,
			Zeq

			PS

			I was actually starting to look forward to this as a way to cure my wikipedia adiction....
			I really should take a break for a while. let's see if I can. best.

Revision as of 05:43, 7 May 2006

Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing. — Jimbo Wales

File:PoodleM1.jpg

Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper.— Robert Frost

And in case you're here with a personal attack: Any time something is written against me, I not only share the sentiment but feel I could do the job far better myself.— Jorge Luis Borges

Please leave comments about my edits to articles, or responses to posts I've left on article talk pages, on those talk pages. Any such comments may be moved or deleted. Many thanks.

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28
29

In a minute there is time For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse. T.S. Eliot, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock

Quickly doing a partial undeletion

Slim, I was just about to delete something when I saw that you had. Do you know that there's a quick way of checking the thousands of boxes so that you can just uncheck the two or three that you don't want to restore? I discovered it only yesterday, having spent hours at the Easter weekend resortoring pages, at least one of which had thousands of versions. You can see it here. It just takes five seconds. I'm not sure if it would be wise for me to jump in and restore something that you may be in the middle of restoring, but if you see this in the meantime, let me know. Otherwise, it may be useful to know for another occasion. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 19:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Done! It's incredibly quick and easy — it makes me groan to think I didn't know about it when I was doing the Christianity talk page a few weeks ago! AnnH ♫ 20:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought I had given the proper link, but now I see that I had only linked to the noticeboard, not the section. I've corrected it now. Basically, it's the information that you get when you go to your watchlist, then to "display and edit the complete list", then to a link on how to check all boxes. I wasn't sure at first how to create a "favourite" without being on an actual website and adding it to my favourites. But eventually, I added a website that had nothing to do with anything to my favourites, and gave it the false name "Check all boxes", and then went to my favourites menu, right-clicked the link, went to "properties", and pasted the code in instead of the existing address. It just took me a few seconds to restore the remaining 12,000 versions. AnnH ♫ 20:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what a monobook is, and the reason I've never installed any of the code thingies that I read about on Misplaced Pages pages is that they sound so complicated. I just, as I said, added a website to my "Favourites", giving it the name "Check all boxes". Then I edited the address location for that particular link in my favourites menu. It's odd, because it's not a web address, and when I'm at the "undelete this page" place, and scroll down to that link in my "favourites", I don't get taken to another website, and the URL in the address bar doesn't change. I just see that two seconds later, all the boxes are checked, and then I uncheck the few that I don't want. I thought it would be really complcated, but in fact, it's incredibly simple! AnnH ♫ 20:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I was just spying on you ;-) to see if you were still online after I sent my last message, and I saw your post to Voice of All. I think the one I was thinking of isn't the same. The one I'm using is this one. I think I saw Voice of All's one, and it sounded far too complicated! :-) AnnH ♫ 20:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you have the Voice of All script, you don't need the other one, presumably. When I sent you that first message, I hadn't tried the other one out on undeletion. I did a partial resoration of a large page yesterday, but did it by restoring the offending version and moving it to another page, deleting the other page, going back to the original page, and restoring all the good versions. But then I managed to install the Check all boxes thing from the link on my "display the complete watchlist". I played with that for a while. Then I went to Amazon.com, and looked at a book. At the bottom of the page, they have boxes to check for other books in that category — biography, 19th century, French writers, etc. I scrolled down to the new "Check all boxes" link in my Favourites, and instantly, all the Amazon boxes were checked. Even while I'm editing your talk page, I can go to that link, and it checks the two boxes for "minor edit" and "watch this page" (well, that one is already ticked). So I was fairly confident when I offered to do it for the undeletion of that page. I went to "undelete 1200 edits", scrolled down to the "check all boxes" in my Favourites, and immmediately, I was still at the same page, but all the 1200 boxes were checked.

Anyway, if you have a version that works, I suppose it doesn't matter which version it is. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 20:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

SlimV, you had an extra "---" that broke the JS. I removed it. Press cntrl-F5. You can also use shift (even withought JS) to select many edits at once.Voice-of-All 20:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Mark Lawson

Comments appreciated on this (just found accidently). Arniep 01:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Crown Copyright

You've just archived your talk page, so I'll respond here. The basic Crown Copyright laid out by HMSO is indeed acceptable as a free license. However, it allows for individual departments to place additional requirements in their copyirhgt notices, some of which make media from them clearly non-free. See for example the copyright notice from the National Archives. Its material is protected by Crown Copyright. However, it also requires the payment of a fee for the use of any of its images. Others, such as the Met Office allow for unlimited reproduction only for private study and scientific research, with any other use requiring explicit permission — ie. {{NonCommercial}}. These also aren't acceptable as free images, though most of the time, the image can be kept under terms of fair use. This is why {{CrownCopyright}} includes a <noinclude> section underneath pointing to the list of acceptable sites at Template talk:CrownCopyright. GeeJo ⁄_(c) • 10:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR

No. If you read the comments made on the 3RR page last week you'll see that, in fact, I was blocked for adding the same words more than three times. Your interpretation of the 3RR rule is overly broad and unique. Homey 13:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Slim, Thanks for your note. I understand. best, Zeq

I was actually starting to look forward to this as a way to cure my wikipedia adiction.... I really should take a break for a while. let's see if I can. best.