| Revision as of 23:39, 9 December 2006 editFroth (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers11,002 edits →Opinions on Ref Desk template removal ?← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:03, 10 December 2006 edit undoFroth (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers11,002 edits preparing for archiveNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Image copyright problem with Image:CurveBall.jpg== | |||
| Thanks for uploading ]. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate ], it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. | |||
| For more information on using images, see the following pages: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| This is an automated notice by ]. For assistance on the image use policy, see ]. 07:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Your request == | |||
| In principle, maybe. In practice, no way. Arbitration should be used as a last resort, when all else has failed. In this case, I think that you should in the first instance file an article RfC. --] 05:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Harry Potter edit== | |||
| No, I was not vandalizing. I thought it a more direct headring. Sorry . -- ] 13:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Award == | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid black; background-color: peach;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="top" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: bottom; height: 1.1em;" | '''XP''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: top; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I, ], hereby award you the '''barnstar of good humour''' for your comment: "It symbolizes the face you make when it fails on you :)" on the reference desk. A very funny and accurate answer to the question that was being posed. | |||
| |} | |||
| ==Thanks== | |||
| I didn't realize there was such a term as ] until you told me, so thanks for pointing that out. It seems that both terms ''are'' used to mean basically the same thing, though "systemic" is probably better to describe what I refer to, and it is also the term used to describe the WikiProject that I support. ]] 05:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == "Aoe 2 maps" question you answered == | |||
| Sorry if I'm being a bit too persistant, but you said | |||
| Unzip to c:\program files\microsoft games\age of empires 2\ | |||
| What's that mean? ] 22:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :See my response at the original page --]<sup>'''] ]'''</sup> 05:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Hey back... == | |||
| Nope. It's the rather rare "Phineas". --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 03:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Thanks! == | |||
| Thanks for your good advice on Reference:Computing. It was really helpful. ] 10:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == RefDesk == | |||
| You've made a few comments, so I'll try to address as many of them as I can. | |||
| Colors: Judging by the design of the Main Page, it doesn't seem like anybody cares at all for consistancy in color design on Misplaced Pages. Using solid grey seems a bit bland, don't you think? I could go a bit more low-key, but to tell you the truth I was more going for a style that would work independant of the external WP appearance, but at the same time not contrast with it. Either way this can be changed easily if there's a few people who feel the same way. | |||
| Specifics: Do you really think biology is too specific, and people won't know how to use it? I don't really feel like we're dealing with small, specific desks here, even with 15 or 20 desks it still seems to me like we're dealing which huge categories. Though saying that, it's very likely that I will remove a few of the less obvious desks (like pop culture), and slim down the proposal to about 9, because we don't seem to be developing a consensus here. | |||
| Jutting out: I imagine that this is just temporary. There should be some other content to fill in the bottom of the page. | |||
| Misc.: It is my opinion that the misc./general desks seem to cause the worst problems here; not only do they become bloated with questions because many questioners are too lazy (not confused) to put them in their correct place, but the kind of response they recieve from editors is sub-par, because there are many editors (especially on the science desk) that don't pay attention to the misc. desk at all, presumably because they think that science questions don't end up there. | |||
| Thanks for your input, it helps. ]] 00:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, you're right. I might just propose a revised design first, and the bot would work fine as well. I honestly was expecting more support, judging by the kind of response I was getting on the RD talk pages. I don't think I'll be bold on this one, people will clearly see my vertical desk orientation as a conspiracy to implement desk splits in the future, so I'll want to cover my ass on that. | |||
| :Funny that you mention a template for moving questions; I'm actually working on a script that would be able to handle that automatically (similar to an AfD script). It's not really needed as the desk is now, but it could definitely be recommended if we were to have to deal with any more desks. ]] 03:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Answer... == | |||
| ...it's not that bad... ] 05:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Uh, what's not that bad? The price of a static IP address? Which is nothing from some ISPs? Who said anything about it being bad? --]<sup>'''] ]'''</sup> 06:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==<small>copied from </small>RD talk== | |||
| ....''If he used a normal smiley I'd be dead fooled :p --]<sup>'''] ]'''</sup> 03:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)'' | |||
| :''Jeesh Bri, when you make posts that makes us pee laughing it seems also to be a thread killer. ;-) --] ] 20:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)'' --] ] 20:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Unhelpful help desk comment == | |||
| While I appreciate that you took the time to comment, really missed the mark. I am not looking to give the work of fixing the article and its affiliated articles to someone else. I don't know what the best route of fixing it is, and I'd rather get some input from a wider audience about it. Telling me I should "just to do it self" is somewhat of a slap in the face when I'm trying to find out where to ask ''how'' I should fix it. For this and in the future, I'd like to know where to spark discussion about a group of articles to help me decide the best course of action for fixing them. ]<sub>]</sub> 01:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm sorry, I thought you were just reporting the article as "yet another that needs serious work". There are thousands of those articles and my answer still stands- there aren't enough editors to keep up, and the ''best'' way to reform an article quickly is to do it yourself. If you were asking for suggestions on how the article can be improved, I belive mgm replied to your original post, and I'd add the link ]. --]<sup>'''] ]'''</sup> 02:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I thought of RfC, but upon reading the first sentence I gave up on the idea. Afterall, dispute resolution isn't what I'm after. However I took another look after reading your comment; you're right, it is not obvious but I think an request without a disagreement (other than perhaps me with myself) is still appropriate for RfC. Thanks for the prompt reply. ]<sub>]</sub> 02:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Bot archiving question == | |||
| Hi - there shouldn't be any problem, as the bot doesn't edit the archival listing pages, nor will it touch the page you linked to. Thanks <strong>]]]</strong> 19:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Fellow ticalc member == | |||
| I am indeed a fellow of ticalc! It's always nice to meet another calculator enthusiast! --]]] <sub><span style="text-decoration:none">]</span></sub> <sup><span style="position: relative; left: -36px; margin-right: -36px; text-decoration:none;">]</span></sup> 01:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Comment wanted on ]'s one week block == | == Comment wanted on ]'s one week block == | ||
Revision as of 00:03, 10 December 2006
Comment wanted on User:light current's one week block
I, and User:Gandalf61, and others, feel that the action of User:Friday in blocking User:light current for a week was unwarranted and excessive: . We would appreciate your comments in this matter. Thanks. StuRat 10:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up --froth 20:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- You're welcome. StuRat 07:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Rules for deletion
Would you care to comment on my proposed Ref Desk Rules for Deletion: ? I would like to build a consensus on which rules should be followed. StuRat 07:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for commenting. I'd also like you to give my proposed rules for deletions an approve or oppose, however, in order to establish a consensus, if you're willing. BTW, you wrote "Some anon ip removed a very valid reply of sturat's earlier today", can you point me to the post in question or at least the Ref Desk in question ? Did you restore my post ? StuRat 10:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, here's the diff. --froth 19:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Ouch!
I realize you're at least partly joking, but damn, do you really feel that I'm vicously censoring? I remove nonsense from all kinds of places all the time- this is the first I've heard it described as such. Friday (talk) 00:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- No, no of course not! Read it carefully- yes it would be unlikely for sex jokes to be mentioned in an article about reference desks, because they've only been one or two isolated incidents. In the same way it would be unlikely for viciously revert-happy admins to be mentioned in such an article because there aren't any. I could have used any example, but one so close to home seemed most potent :) --froth 06:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I'm trying to be more polite about this since it's clear I've rubbed at least some people the wrong way. Friday (talk) 14:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate you asking for clarification rather than jumping to conclusions- some of us are still sore about similar things happening in the past --froth 20:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Bah. That's what I get for jumping in with both feet and not knowing the history. Thanks for the explanation. Friday (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate you asking for clarification rather than jumping to conclusions- some of us are still sore about similar things happening in the past --froth 20:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I'm trying to be more polite about this since it's clear I've rubbed at least some people the wrong way. Friday (talk) 14:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Rules for Ref Desk opinions ?
Would you care to comment on rules for Ref Desk opinions: Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#Next_item_for_consensus_discussion:_Opinion ? StuRat 17:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Opinions on Ref Desk template removal ?
Sorry to bother you again, but would you care to comment on: Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#Opinions_on_template_removal ? StuRat 21:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Possbily not the kind of comment you expected, but I think I brick-walled the discussion while they all try to figure out what I actually said :) --froth 23:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)