Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:11, 25 March 2008

Archives

Archive 1 - epoch — July 7, 2007 Archive 2 - July — Nov 25, 2007 Archive 3 - Nov 25, 2007 — March 6, 2008

RfB

Not that your support or opposition is going to change anything at this late stage, , but i have responded at length to your concerns, and must admit, I am troubled by your decision to focus on one, uncontrolled event, instead of looking at 30+ months of consistent editing. More specific examples are on the RfB page. Thank you for your time and interest in participating. -- Avi (talk) 15:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

My final response is posted on the RfB page; thank you for taking the time to engage in discussion, albeit that we agree to disagree. As a courtesy, I am letting you that I plan to re-run for RfB after a few weeks/months more participation on RfA's. I hope by that time you will have come to understand with, and agree to, my point, but if not, please bring your concerns again at that time. Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Request layout change on editing buttons

Plesae see Bugzilla:13065, it went to WONTFIX as final outcome. Thank you for you attention.--Namazu-tron (talk) 03:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikisource collaboration on George W. Bush

Sure. I'll tackle the radio addresses, and search for speeches. - Mtmelendez 03:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfB

I wanted to personally thank you, Jay, for your participation in my recent RfB. I am sorry that you feel that once incident, in which I was a passive participant, and over which I had no control was enough to outweigh 30+ months and 21K+ edits, and I am gratified that almost everyone else saw fit to either support my request, or oppose for technical and not fundamental reasons. Regardless, if you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 18:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

WS Collaboration project

G'day, this weeks Wikisource collaboration project is G. W. Bush. We need your help ! :-) John Vandenberg (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm afraid that I have neither the time nor the motivation to participate this time around. Nonetheless, good luck to you! —Remember the dot 05:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The article Anthony Pratt (Visy Board)was first added in October 2007, then a few comment from a disgruntled person were added on Feb 21st 2008, we tried to take them off, but they we coming back. Anthony Pratt asked to take the entire article off as it posses a risk to his image.

What proof do we need to show to prevent the repopulation of the article? Or is there a legal address we can put in communication to with our Legal council?

I have to users here: jsmdbm and jmerelo and we represent Anthony Pratt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmerelo (talk • contribs) 03:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

Dear Jay, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats.
I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight.
I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community.
I was a little miserable after the results came out, so I'm going to spread the love via dancing hippos. As you do. :)
I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Article deletion.

yes, thanks. There was a mistake in the title. You can delete that page, that'll be fine. Thanks again.

oh also, if you could, the title of this article: Oakwood (Staten Island Railway station) is incorrect, it should be: Oakwood Heights (Staten Island Railway station) Again, thanks a lot. Maigot1 (talk) 04:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Article Deletion

Hi there,

We noticed that the article "PDFNet SDK" was deleted by you in September 2007. The article explained a PDF software library (an alternative high-performing technology to Adobe's technology).

If go to the category "PDF", go to #7(Implementations), and then under "See Also" go to "List of PDF Software", you will find a list of different PDF software tools and development libraries (both open source as well as proprietary).

Since PDFNet SDK is a very reputable PDF development library and an alternative to Adobe's technology, we felt it was a very valid addition to that list (and as such also the creation of the article). It was done by following the examples of other companies and software listed on that page.

If the entry of PDFNet SDK was invalid, then perhaps the whole "List of PDF Software" and the articles they point to should be deleted as well. If not, then we would appreciate the undeletion of the article and the inclusion of the entry in the list.

In case you need more information about PDFNet SDK or the company PDFTron Systems Inc., there is plenty of informaiton available on the internet.

Thank you in advance for your consideration, —Preceding unsigned comment added by PDFguru (talk • contribs) 00:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

In response to your inquiry:

"If you can identify independent reviews of "PDFNet SDK", by reputable sources (preferably in print), I will look at them. John Vandenberg (talk) 00:47, 13 March 2008" (UTC)(Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:PDFguru")

You can find the most recent, independent review of PDFNet SDK in an article "High-Level Programmierung" published in the December 2007 issue of Desktop Dialog - Das Publishing Magazin (a German DTP/Prepress magazine) as part of its monthly "PDF in Motion" series. You can probably view the article at: or you can also refer to the following link:

PDFNet SDK is also often reviewed as well as listed on independent, reputable PDF and developer community sites such as Planet PDF , Dev Direct and others.

Isn't this the kind of information though that is reviewed before an article is deleted? PDFguru (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

In general, no. The onus is to provide evidence of notability not to prove lack of it. --BozMo talk 14:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I see. The notability of PDFNet SDK would probably be easier to see for someone involved in the PDF field, but may be more difficult to recognize for someone not generally interested in this area. In the PDF developer community, PDFNet SDK is well known.

Regarding "There is an expectation that an admin will look for sources if it is an obviously "notable" topic, however it isnt required. In this case, I wasnt able to find any quickly. This looks ok; can you identify others? John Vandenberg (talk) 01:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)"

...So, in addition to the article mentioned, you can also find an independent printed and online review of PDFNet SDK in a 2005 issue of How-to-Select Guide for PDF .NET components:

Perhaps it may also help that PDFNet SDK and PDFTron are listed in the Open Directory Project (Dmoz) to which Misplaced Pages already points to for External Sources (under the 'List of PDF Software'). See: and

In addition, there are also a number of news and listings about PDFNet SDK (and PDFTron). For some examples please see: , , , , ,, , , etc., etc.

Hopefully this will help to prove the 'notability' of PDFNet SDK and be sufficient to add it to the 'List of PDF Software' and undelete the article. Thanks.PDFguru (talk) 23:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

WSEAS

To me the recent expansion at WSEAS seemed too much (I commented at the talk. Frankly I had just assumed one of it's staff had done that, but presumably I was mistaken. Pete St.John (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I had similar thoughts, but I decided against rolling back in order to help bring the user into the fold. I think we need to integrate the new content offered by these users, and show them how to present it nicely. John Vandenberg (talk) 23:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Pardon me, I got confused about who editted which. And agreed, we'd like to help them integrate, but the last revert was an SPA-- a new one, a single-edit-account. Anyway thanks for your patience. Pete St.John (talk) 03:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Prem Rawat Case...

I hope this is the right place for this question(s) (I think I saw it was you who opened the case), if it's inappropriate, or should be directed elsewhere by policy, please let me know. After reviewing all the relevant documentation I could find it looks like I was a little quick off the draw with my statement regarding the Prem ArbCom case. It seems that my comment would have been better located on the evidence page after the case was opened. Do I need to cutNpaste my comments onto that page, or will my initial statement be considered already? or is there something else I should be doing if I want my statements considered?

Thanks.

-- Maelefique 02:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Your initial statement will continue to be read and considered by everyone, however it is advisable to distil it down into smaller chunks of evidence, and place them on the evidence page. Take a look at one or two prior cases to see how the evidence is presented: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance/Evidence (case closed) and Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Highways 2/Evidence (case yet to be closed). John Vandenberg (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi again! I hope this is still the right place for this, if not, please point me to the right place and I'll continue over there. How do I find out who the clerk is for this Prem Rawat arbitration? Or am I not supposed to know? Even though I am over my 1000 words, by about 200, am I allowed to respond to counterpoints made by Jossi? And thirdly, as I said at the end of my statement, there is some "evidence" placed on the page by one IsabellaW, I think her section contains nothing of value, does not mention the "defendant" (accused? other?) at all, and is quite a demonstration of rambling, in short, I think it should be removed, and was a little surprised to see it hadn't been. I don't see it's point of being there, but I understand that's a job for the clerk, no?-- Maelefique 06:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I am the clerk; I have read the evidence section added by IsabellaW, and I dont feel that it is imperative that it is removed. If you need to reply to the counterpoints made by Jossi, please be very brief :- the evidence page isnt supposed to be a discussion page. John Vandenberg (talk) 08:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the information, I didn't mean to imply that the removal was imperative, only that it provides no evidence for or against the case whatsoever. She has not presented a single diff, and let's not forget, this entire arbitation is about Jossi's behaviour, not Prem Rawat. Her entire "evidence" is about Prem Rawat. On that basis alone, it seems reasonable to remove it. Its inflammatory and massively biased nature is another issue entirely. However if you've read it and don't agree, I have no problem with that. Thanks again. -- Maelefique 16:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:Wikiproject Tool update

A few updates in events:

• Maynard James Keenan has been listed for copy-edit at the WP:LoCE, however, the backlog is quite long. Therefore, if anyone has copy-editing skills, please go over the article. I would do it myself, but I've done quite a bit of work on the article and I am incapable of copy-editing my own work.
• Maynard James Keenan discography has been worked back into the bio and has been determined to be redundant of the main discographies. It will most likely be deleted this week.
• Devo Keenan has been created. I think this is a good opportunity for the project to get together and create a DYK entry. The article needs to be expanded and referenced. Hopefully this is possible. I've not yet looked to see how much information is available. Please take time to help with this, if you can. We have four days!!

Thanks to everyone who has helped thus far. The project is still very new, but good progress is being made! Lara❤Love 03:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

the sydney Journal

Hi there, Just thought I'd drop you, and others from the recent meetup, a line and mention that the first edition of the Dictionary of Sydney's online, peer-reviewed journal is now live.

The Sydney Journal is the first (and most academically rigorous) "product" of the Dictionary. It will be a quarterly publication with a variety of texts from upcoming Dictionary articles and is hosted by UTS E-press. This edition features 4 thematic articles, 6 ethnicities and 5 suburbs - all specifically related to Sydney.

I hope you find it useful and interesting - If nothing else it's essays are eminently referenceable for their corresponding articles here on WP.

Best, Witty Lama 12:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikisource calls again

Me again :-) We have two candidates for CU on Wikisource, and we need to accumulate 25 votes in favour in order to be approved. While I am one of the candidates, I dont mind whether you vote for or against me; this note is just to ensure that you know that as you are a serious contributor to Wikisource, and we dont have many, your input is desirable at this stage. John Vandenberg (talk) 05:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to support you, but I don't have a strong opinion on the other candidates. I'm sure you'll do well! —Remember the dot 05:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for participating. I'm sure Pathoschild wont mind; he has been around a lot longer, so I am sure he will also fair well. John Vandenberg (talk) 07:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the nice welcome message

Hi, John,

Thank you for the warm and very helpful welcome.

I'll try not to pester you with too many questions. That {{helpme}} is a really cool trick.

Kindest regards, Snakesteuben (talk) 08:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, ahem, here's something that's been bugging me for a few weeks. I see you're also present on the de wiki.

I would like to crank out some wishlist items that have existed for 6 months or more. Most of these are on the Deutsch site and/or wiktionary entries. But the idea is applicable here, too. But I'm struggling with the formatting--especially on the German side, my German is a bit better than kein--at bedenklich (dubious). So I haven't written word one, except for an aborted draft hung off my user page.

Then I came up with what I thought was a brilliant idea! I thought I'd put the word, translation, information, complete with usage notes, etc., unformatted, on the word's talk page. Then I would point the original requester to that talk page, and make an entry on the wishlist page also pointing to what I had done. The original page would still show up as a redlink, so no harm would be done.

The user who wanted it would have his information, and whenever someone was motivated to write the entry, they could see the content I put there, and use/adapt it, or not, just starting from scratch. Again, no worse off. And nobody gives me a boatload of Mist for screwing up the formatting.

But it doesn't work! I looked around to see if anyone ever did that. On the contrary. Discussion on a redlink page is grounds for speedy deletion! Oh well.

I don't get that. It seems as though there are some people who affirmatively enjoy the formatting side--or writing bots/procedures for formatting entries. OTOH, I'll bet I could crank out 20 in the time it takes me to format one to everybody's satisfaction.

Do you think my idea might have any merit whatsoever?

Thanks again, Snakesteuben (talk) 08:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Absolutely Brilliant! Do you have a fan page/forum? (But I'll definitely let you know if my DE nemesis busts my chops about the stub. :-P) Snakesteuben (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. If anybody wants templates ported across wikis, consider me a resource. (E.g. I've just about finished adapting this one over to Frisian.)

Snakesteuben (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

new day, new colour, to help the long-winded one keep track of her place

Especially take note of the key differences between a Echter and Falscher stub. Native speakers of German are much more picky about how you use their language, and about quality,

Tell me about it! Let's just say I found that one out the hard way. Ugh. Thanks loads for the specific pointer! I have found people a little more indulgent when I decloaked as female, and stuck this custom template in my profile. A little self-deprecating humour can go a long way.

(You already know the meaning of bedenkliche. :-) )

If you do like translating templates, I would be grateful if you could translate Template:Bible translation infobox into as many languages as you can.

Whoa, guy. That is some voh-ca-byoo-larry you got there! I meant mainly cross-wiki coding quirks, and standard wiki words, but I'll do my best. The code looks very uninter... erm, straightforward (except that some of the third-world projects don't seem to have the same #if behaviour as the more populated sites). Here's an idea, once I throw the code over and fill in the easy stuff, maybe you or I can troll the left-lingua pane of a germane topic article or two, find an author with an en-2+, and get some help there?

At any rate, I'll keep you posted so as not to have any of your minions duplicating effort.

Winter S. (talk) 10:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC) (Still me, decloaking just a little bit)

P.S. Y'know, another thing about that DE crowd. Even the en-3+ totally don't grok (i.e., "get" if you're not at all familiar with Heinlein, but since I see you as a theologian, I give it 50/50) my sense of humour. Gheheh! -Winter

Well, gee, since there's two follyglot anglos now, I guess I should create a User Category over here, huh?

Winterx —Preceding comment was added at 13:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Work permit (United Kingdom)

Just out of curiousity, how did you know that copyright permission had been given for this article? I don't know anything about the OTRS system. Until I saw that you'd put the OTRS template on the talk page, I thought you were inappropriately trying to resurrect some article which should have been deleted. --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 20:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I have access to the m:OTRS system. John Vandenberg (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks 4 the welcome!

Hi, yea thanks. I love Misplaced Pages. I'm definitely interested in being a part of that project, although I don't know of any public domain docs that would be of use at the moment. Still I'd love to join, thanks for your help. Maigot1 (talk) 06:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey. Quick courtesy pointer.

Well, you were right about the category!

There's some chance you might be interested in glancing at the hints on the discussion page before they get deleted. None are finished yet, but I went ahead and pasted what I had from various places.

http://en.wikipedia.org/Category_talk:User_follyglot

Winter S. (talk) 07:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry I forgot to close that yellow style the other day. Oeps! *sheepish grin*

-Winterxx

No worries about the excess of yellow. I was waiting to see if anyone would fix it; they didnt; I need more minions. John Vandenberg (talk) 07:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Shushavian Noble???

if it is before 1923 what book is it from??? Why are you reverting without explnation???? I keep asking the people for a source so I can check, but all I get is reverts!!70.21.139.214 (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Music

Please unprotect Music. You semi-protected it due to vandalism, but did not leave a note that this was permanent or any information on the discussion page. If it's permanent, please justify and explain on the discussion page, otherwise please remove the semi-protection. It seems to me these things should be temporary, since Misplaced Pages brags that "anyone can edit," and if they're taking care of a temporary problem, or noted on the article if they're permanent. --Blechnic (talk) 20:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sanchez

In the future, when Sanchez posts on my Talk page via an IP sock, if you're going to intervene, I'd prefer you remove his attacks, rather than merely adding his latest IP sig. Otherwise, you're enabling Sanchez, although I'm sure you don't see it quite that way. -- Eleemosynary (talk) 10:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I doubt that all of these IPs are Sanchez, so please dont make accusations unless there is significant evidence. It is more likely that due to editing a high profile bio you have a few users who dont approve and have a chip on their shoulder. It's your user page, so I wouldnt want to remove something unless it was quite clear violation of our policies - I only added the sig so anyone looking at your talk page would know that the user has been warned. John Vandenberg (talk) 10:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Then I retract my statement about "enabling" in the edit summary. However, there is significant evidence that the anon poster was Sanchez, as his petulant habit since his ban has been to "snipe from cover," as it were. --Eleemosynary (talk) 10:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. My guess was that this isnt him. John Vandenberg (talk) 10:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

GM - Auto Racing Addition

Thanks for welcome. Please review the article now and let me know if references used meet the requirements.

Ron, w9kfb W9kfb (talk) 04:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)