Revision as of 18:48, 17 February 2015 editSalvidrim! (talk | contribs)Edit filter helpers, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors28,650 edits →Looks like UxUmbrella is back: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:43, 17 February 2015 edit undoSteeletrap (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,937 edits →Why is the SPI open?: hello?Next edit → | ||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
I am sorry for being confrontational. But admin accountability is atrocious on WP. And you did imply you'd consult with the "SPI team," yet you haven't done that. ] (]) 00:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC) | I am sorry for being confrontational. But admin accountability is atrocious on WP. And you did imply you'd consult with the "SPI team," yet you haven't done that. ] (]) 00:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
:An SPI is just an investigation. Every case is investigated no matter the evidence. Some are endorsed for CU, some result in sanctions, some are rejected as baseless, but there is no harm done by just investigating. If you've been truthful: at best, you'll be exonerated; At worst, the case will be closed as inconclusive. And I did not imply I would consult my colleagues: I explicitly said so, and I will stick to that, and only after will anything be done with the case. I did hope we would get around to it this week, which evidently couldn't happen, but k have faith that we'll have a chance to discuss it over the weekend. <span style="font-family:Sylfaen;color:white;background:black;padding:0 3px;">☺ · ] · ]</span> 00:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC) | :An SPI is just an investigation. Every case is investigated no matter the evidence. Some are endorsed for CU, some result in sanctions, some are rejected as baseless, but there is no harm done by just investigating. If you've been truthful: at best, you'll be exonerated; At worst, the case will be closed as inconclusive. And I did not imply I would consult my colleagues: I explicitly said so, and I will stick to that, and only after will anything be done with the case. I did hope we would get around to it this week, which evidently couldn't happen, but k have faith that we'll have a chance to discuss it over the weekend. <span style="font-family:Sylfaen;color:white;background:black;padding:0 3px;">☺ · ] · ]</span> 00:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
:: Are you really looking into the SPI? I'm skeptical. If I were to guess, you shot a brief email to the "team," and no substantively discussions about my case have occurred. Whether the cause of this delay is laziness or real life obligations, I am entitled to a swift resolution of a frivolous claim. Please close this nonsense now, or provide a reason why you think they have made a case against me. ] (]) 22:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC) | |||
== Your user infobox == | == Your user infobox == |
Revision as of 22:43, 17 February 2015
This is Salvidrim!'s talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Salvidrim!. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
Archives |
2011 - Q3–Q4 |
"Addressing an accuracy"
Bonjour Benoit,
Merci pour ton commentaire au sujet de la construction "address an accuracy". L'anglais n'est pas ma langue maternelle et je veux bien croire que cette construction est valide, mais puis-je te demander plus d'information à ce sujet? Est-ce une expression, et sinon, qu'est-ce que ça signifie? Le premier résultat sur Google parle de "address the accuracy problem", ce qui est clairement valide, mais est-ce que c'est le cas dans la controverse en question ou quoi? Est-ce que le sens utilisé fait partie des - ahem - 15 répertoriés pour le verbe "to address"?
Pour mettre en contexte, j'avais entendu parler du GamerGate, sans trop creuser. Je comprend en gros ce que dit l'entrée, mais même après la lecture de l'article du Washington Post, les détails m'échappent (on parle de 5 éditeurs bannis, puis de 1, ce qui peut apparaître comme une contradiction à première vue). --Chealer (talk) 04:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Pour la petite histoire - The Guardian a publié un article parlant de 5 éditeurs bannis, alors que c'était une décision proposée de l'ArbCom -- pas encore confirmé. ArbCom a publié un statement redressant les faits ("addressing the accuracy" of the Guardian article). La décision finale s'est avérée être qu'un seul des éditeurs a été bannis, ce qu'à correctement rapporté le Washington Post.
- Selon Google, la traduction de "address the accuracy" serait "régler la précision", ce qui est plutôt pauvre; dans ce cas-ci la traduction litéralle de "address", dans le sens de "give attention to", serait "s'occuper de" ou "répondre à"; une expression équivalente pourrait être "redresser les faits", "remettre les pendules à l'heure", ou "rétablir la vérité". ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:53, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Merci pour la petite histoire. Je viens de lire l'énoncé du comité (ce que j'aurais du faire avant), et je comprend maintenant ce qui est arrivé, et ce que la phrase essaie de dire. Par contre, j'avoue que je ne suis pas convaincu de la formulation. Effectivement, la traduction littéralle est boiteuse au mieux. Pour ce qui est de "donner de l'attention à la précision", ce n'est pas faux, mais ça ne me parle vraiment pas. "to address" peut vouloir dire "répondre à", mais si ce qui suit est un besoin, ce qui n'est pas le cas ici. Je suis d'accord que "rectifier les fait", "remettre les pendules à l'heure", ou "rétablir la vérité" décrivent bien la situation. Par contre, je vois mal comment "(donner de l'attention à / s'occuper de) la précision des réactions" évoqueraient le sens de ces expressions. Dans le premier cas, ça sonne passif, et dans le deuxième cas, c'est extrêmement vague. --Chealer (talk) 03:06, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Désolé d'avance si mon français est rouillé... Je pense que "Addressing an accuracy" est un moyen d'exprimer les événements tout en réservant son jugement sur la vérité des revendications sous-jacentes. C'est important pour WP:NPOV parce que Misplaced Pages est l'une des parties à la controverse. Si nous disons "Revealed the truth of the matter" ou "Set the record straight" ou même "Corrected these reports", nous disons quelque chose que nous savons être vrai, mais qui n'apparaît pas dans les RS. Je pense que "addressed the accuracy" est le plus neutre. -Thibbs (talk) 13:00, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Re:A-class
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#On_the_status_of_our_A-class_articles - yeah, we're not supporting A-class anymore, since we don't have a strong definition of what it is, don't really use it (we've been at 42 A-class articles since November 2013), there's a bunch of GAs that are better than half of our A-class articles, and most people don't even stop there between GA and FA. It's not retroactive, it's just that if an article cannot be A-class anymore then its template needs to be updated (class=A now points to unassessed). --PresN 21:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- PresN Ah, thanks for the link - I had indeed completely missed that particular discussion. I remember starting an "RfC" about this three years ago (jeez!), but it didn't result in any actionable consensus. I would've personally favored a result similar to option 2 (instead of the effective actuel option 1), but nobody cares about A-Class either way so it's nothing to shake a stick at. You might want to delete or mark failed Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games/Assessment/A Class Guidelines, and maybe other pages I haven't stumbled upon? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
User:70.189.56.157
Back as User:223.85.17.193 BMK (talk) 04:27, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Drmies blocked it. BMK (talk) 04:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
UTRS Appeal 12782
Hey - you spoke to RHaworth about this ticket but you didn't follow up either. Could you check it out? https://utrs.wmflabs.org/appeal.php?id=12782 .--v/r - TP 04:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Since you're on, I'm on a marathon to clear the backlog. You in?--v/r - TP 04:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- I went back to it every time I went to UTRS but hadn't had the chance to really make up my mind and take a decision. No, it's not a socking violation, but I agree with RHaworth's point that unblocking is very unlikely to lead to productive editing. However, in the end, I prefer undoing the "wrong block" without prejudice for a future "right block". Thanks for poking me into action, TParis, and sure, I'll take a gander. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm done for the night - we did some good work.--v/r - TP 05:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Damn right we did. Thanks for making me work, for once, and for helping out too. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm done for the night - we did some good work.--v/r - TP 05:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- I went back to it every time I went to UTRS but hadn't had the chance to really make up my mind and take a decision. No, it's not a socking violation, but I agree with RHaworth's point that unblocking is very unlikely to lead to productive editing. However, in the end, I prefer undoing the "wrong block" without prejudice for a future "right block". Thanks for poking me into action, TParis, and sure, I'll take a gander. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Ninninger episodes
You messed up when you reverted my edit on List of Shuriken Sentai Ninninger episodes. It wasn't vandalism. I corrected the spelling of February, and intending to fix the date (Sentai doesn't air new episodes on Thursdays, so 26 was wrong) added 7 to 22 to get 29, forgetting that as there are only 28 days in February, I should've put March 1 (whoops). I see this has now been fixed, but you should've corrected the date manually instead of reverting me, as by reverting me, you in fact restored poor spelling and the date was still wrong. Digifiend (talk) 15:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry! All I saw was "29 February 2015" and I immediately thought "this guy must be trolling". Thanks for patching things up! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 15:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
More Macy VG IP vandals
Hey, there are two more IPs that keep adding Super Mario Galaxy 3 into the Mario series template and to the SMG2 article: 1 and 2. It is extremely likely they're the same as the Macy VG IP vandal. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- They are but I'm on mobile. Please report on AIV with my blessing. Thanks ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:16, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Nvm, handled it. Thanks for your vigilance. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Why is the SPI open?
WP policy clearly establishes that SPIs cannot be conducted unless there is a strong chance that the user being investigated is actually a sock. Can you please tell me why you haven't closed this case, or, alternatively, explain why you think there is sufficient evidence to keep it open? The only "reasoning" I've seen from you is that, because someone you 'trust' says, with no evidence or argument,, that I am likely to be a Sock, that it should remain open. I am sorry for being confrontational. But admin accountability is atrocious on WP. And you did imply you'd consult with the "SPI team," yet you haven't done that. Steeletrap (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- An SPI is just an investigation. Every case is investigated no matter the evidence. Some are endorsed for CU, some result in sanctions, some are rejected as baseless, but there is no harm done by just investigating. If you've been truthful: at best, you'll be exonerated; At worst, the case will be closed as inconclusive. And I did not imply I would consult my colleagues: I explicitly said so, and I will stick to that, and only after will anything be done with the case. I did hope we would get around to it this week, which evidently couldn't happen, but k have faith that we'll have a chance to discuss it over the weekend. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Are you really looking into the SPI? I'm skeptical. If I were to guess, you shot a brief email to the "team," and no substantively discussions about my case have occurred. Whether the cause of this delay is laziness or real life obligations, I am entitled to a swift resolution of a frivolous claim. Please close this nonsense now, or provide a reason why you think they have made a case against me. Steeletrap (talk) 22:43, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Your user infobox
A thought regarding this edit:
EST (UTC−05:00)
{{#ifeq:{{Current daylight saving offset in North America}}|0 |EST (]) |EDT (])}}
Works? Could be better though. --Tgeairn (talk) 05:55, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- I pretty much know nothing of such syntax, so I've no idea if it would work :p I'll have to test it! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- That should work, but if you want to link the timezone then add that:
{{#ifeq:{{Current daylight saving offset in North America}}|0 |] (]) |] (])}}
- Cheers!
Tgeairn (talk) 06:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Adventure Time: Hey Ice King! Why'd You Steal Our Garbage?!!
I guess I must've messed up on that one, so I'm sorry about that, but I'm just trying to have the title of the page align with Misplaced Pages's MoS: "the English-language titles of compositions (books and other print works, songs and other audio works, films and other visual media works, paintings and other artworks, etc.) are given in title case, in which every word is given an initial capital except for certain less important words".--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- Don't worry too much about it, Misplaced Pages processes are sometimes a bit obtuse. If you want to propose changing the title of the page, you need to follow the instructions to start a requested move discussion. Pages should never ever be moved by copy-pasting their content, since doing it basically destroys the revision history. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
UTRS appeal 13133
I responded to your question about UTRS appeal #13133 on my talk page. TL;DNR: no objection. --Yamla (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, I just wanted to make sure there's weren't some circumstances I wasn't aware of. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:31, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Hey
I just wanted to say thanks for all your help in the UTRS area - it's greatly appreciated. — Ched : ? 08:39, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- No probs! I can be an insufferable lazy slacker but I still enjoy helping out whenever I can!! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 13:47, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Looks like UxUmbrella is back
The quacking is hurting my ears. –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your vigilance (and sorry for my clumsiness omg) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)