Misplaced Pages

User talk:Franamax/Archive 1

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Franamax

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Franamax (talk | contribs) at 11:40, 2 September 2008 (mkarchive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:40, 2 September 2008 by Franamax (talk | contribs) (mkarchive)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

If you're interested in working on local articles, you might want to check out Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Vancouver or Misplaced Pages:WikiProject British Columbia. Cheers, bobanny 04:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Tool question

Inserted by Franamax:

Hi GWH, I have picked you randomly on my wanderings. I notice in your discourse with 208.65.188.149/"El Jigue" that you claim "I went back 500 edits, then walked forwards..."
This seems to confirm that there is no extant tool that would let me pick an arbitrary piece of text and say "who/when/why did this first appear?". Is the only way by human inspection of a series of diff's? There is an evident simplicity in creating such a tool and also evident vast complications. Are you aware of any such efforts?
Thanks Franamax 01:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Completing the thread, answer follows Franamax 11:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know of there is no such tool.

To do it right, I think you'd need to have an extension in the MediaWiki server to do it in the database. I've been fooling around with MediaWiki code, but am not up to programming something like that at the moment.

For now... everyone does it by hand.

Georgewilliamherbert 07:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


Inserted by Franamax:
Casliber, with ref to Durova's talk page - please tell me there's no such thing as wiki-eavesdropping! You can easily see that I'm new here - one of the huge attractions for me is that so far as I have found, EVERYTHING in Misplaced Pages is recorded, archived, and open to inspection. There are definitely places where things have been closed off, users deleted, diff's not available, "redacted" if you will. But all those instances I have seen are referenced by some other trace, so I know they have at least occurred. If there are truly black areas of WP, please don't tell me Santa.
At my point of development I would rather call it gathering, learning, integrating - but I hope that I can be bold whenever and stick my nose in whenever.
As to the tool I describe, no promises, if you wish I will notify you when I have further descriptions of same conecpt on my talk page. I enjoy algorithms and lexical analysis. Any input you may have as to analysis tools, you can put on my talk under Tool question for now. Mayhap I have identified a need which I can fulfill :) No promises. Franamax 12:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Completing the thread, answer follows Franamax 11:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Haha - tricky all this - like mass blogging. I am wary to only ever write very uncontroversial/straightforward things here as it's completely public. My issue is when trying to work things up for Featured Article Candidacy and everything has to be referenced and someone entered something way back when..like trying to find a needle in a haystack really. Can you imagine trawling through versions of this? Gah! Anyway, welcome aboard.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

A test of my work on this tool. Franamax 05:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL still testing Franamax 06:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Gosh! Well blow me down as Popeye said. Just got back from a short trip and will investigate this further. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Most livable city

I can't imagine that anyone who might've replied didn't because of all the blah blah. But if a discussion gets too messy, it seems to work best to start a new section and even repeat comments if they got lost in the fray without being addressed. People would get PO'd if you altered their comments, but it's also perfectly acceptable to re-organize comments to make the overall discussion legible, such as breaking it up into smaller sections. I find it more common to post a comment on a talk page and have it sit there for many months before getting a response, if it gets any at all. Some of us (especially me and Skookum1 on the Vancouver Project) tend to be long-winded and meander off into tangents, so others might see me as part of a problem that I don't see myself. There are talk page guidelines that some of us frequently break, and it's okay to jump in and remind people to get back on topic or whatever. But it's not like we're in danger of running out of space for these discussions, and personally, I find them more productive oftentimes if they're dynamic and provocative than by-the-book and clinical. It also helps to assume your audience has ADHD. cheers, bobanny 16:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Testing a talk subpage User talk:Franamax/sub-page Franamax 18:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Testing Section

Here I will try to create some talk sub-pages

here goes

1st one worked, let's try again

A Speedy Question

Regarding New Inn Tennis Courts, I got lucky. I'm a newpage patroller, and when I find something that needs to be speedied, I tend to check users other edits for anything else that needs tagging. In that case the person who created New Inn Tennis Courts had made an edit to the AfD discussion for it. My only suggestions would be to see if your bot can surf their user talk pages (& possibly it's history) for AfD notifications for that article. Good luck with the bot, if you get it running well it'll help stamp out the annoying recreations. Improbcat 15:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

To answer your questions:
1)I am not assigned a list, I just hit Special:Newpages (I usually use the link from my newpages patroller infobox) and work my way down the list. I pull up everything that looks worth checking in separate tabs and work my way across.
2)Sometimes another person has hit the article before me, it's completely random. Some times everything I load has already been tagged, sometimes nothing. The only way I know if someone else has hit that page is if they've tagged it in some way. Aside for (very rarely) changing a speedy tag to something more appropriate, or adding/removing tags based on my own research I don't care if someone else has been there.
3)I can see where that info could be quite useful, *much* moreso if you can get the output to wikilink to the article, user and previous AfD/deletion log. Perhaps you can create a sub-page of your user page, or a page on the user side of things (one of the ones that start with "Misplaced Pages:") where this is outputted to. Course at that point it'd need a way to limit how much is on that page. Perhaps auto-removing articles that become redlinked, and having it not re-add articles as users remove them because they are valid (or in their 2nd AfD or whatnot). Not sure how to promote it, short of word of mouth. Manually tagging articles, and putting a link to the page might work.
4)Not a clue, never worked with bots myself so I can't guess where to start. I'm sure there is a page on it if you do some digging around. Improbcat 14:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


- - - - - - crPatrol - test output sample

Title: Benjamin page User: Woodburyu Date: 06:48, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071025

Title: Cesari and McKenna User: Rollinsk Date: 06:47, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071025

Title: Zulqarnain zaidi User: Znzaidi Date: 06:46, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Roger Bourke White User: Cyreenik Date: 06:43, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Yamanote Halloween Train User: Daikanyama Date: 06:06, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Rock Instrumental Classics User: People Week Guy Date: 05:53, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071007

Title: NBA Live series soundtracks User: Adambaker04 Date: 05:10, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071020

Title: Dustin Haskins User: Beldingfan Date: 05:02, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Giblink User: Tosshoo Date: 03:34, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071018

Title: Glove gun User: Jamesclemow Date: 03:13, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Peter Slowik User: Just plain Bill Date: 02:48, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071025

Title: Alfreda Williams User: AlfredaW Date: 02:30, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071024

Title: Gamma Adventurers User: Maxgamma17 Date: 02:29, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071025

Title: TYRO GYN PHI User: Agustinclan Date: 02:12, 25 October 2007
FLAG: Deleted at dtm 20071022

- - - End of sample - - - Franamax 08:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it

JzG's revert had nothing to do with you. To a new user it may appear that he is reverting you, but that's just a quirk of the differencing page. No experienced user would think it was you he was reverting. It's nothing to worry about. ATren 12:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


The diff screen shows the selected revision and the previous revision. There is really no relation between the two - they are just sequential. It is somewhat confusing because there is no guarantee that the newer change is in any way related to the previous one. Think of the left hand side as simply a preview for the previous change - it is not at all related to the diff in question. In effect, the top left rectangle could be eliminated from that screen without losing any information pertinent to the change being viewed - it really is just a preview. Any change you make will make the diffs appear this way. But as I said, experienced users already know enough that the two revisions are not necessarily related (and often aren't) ATren 15:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Metro Vancouver water

The inputs I made has since been edited by User:Ckatz.--Cahk (talk) 09:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've tweaked the wording of it again.--Cahk (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
We certainly did.--Cahk (talk) 11:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I am waiting to see police in action again... last year I remembered seeing a police car parked outside a Shoppers because of water frenzy.--Cahk (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note

Thanks for the note on my talk page. I've replied there. Carcharoth (talk) 12:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

RfC or AN/I?

Hi, you just reverted my edits of User talk:Durova without a linked explanation. You left the message "RfC or AN/I" but they weren't linked so I don't know what you're talking about. Scott Keeler (talk) 03:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for TALK page note

I've replied there. Good points. Most arguments boil down to epistemology, do they not? "How strong do we know this?" as Feynman used to say. SBHarris 01:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

If you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?

That's what my mother always says. Kevlar67 (talk) 09:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

IP range contribution checking

I'll take you up on that client-side tool. Digging around, looks like it's just 4.252.0.0/16, not a 24.Kww (talk) 00:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll admit to minor stupidity ... I've never e-mailed a user that didn't have an "e-mail this user" button somewhere on his home page, and I don't know how to do it without one. I scanned over those edits, and reverted two pieces of vandalism that got missed.Kww (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:You Idiot!

It was a practical joke which, in my twisted mind, seemed absurdly funny. Ha Ha. :) Editorofthewiki (talk) 00:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

wpW5

wpW5 sounds absolutely amazing. I hope you can pull it off. You should consider it as a commercially-licensed product (for unlimited access) and keep it limited to 5 searches per day for "normal" free subscribers. - Yug Pah Yug (talk) 04:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-admin Rollback

You valiantly tried to fix the page flow up after I made the mistake of putting a response to an editor in a place where the whole thread was liable to be disrupted. I made a stab at putting a post of mine where I would prefer it to be. Please review and if you don't think it's appropriate, revert what I did. No diff's supplied, I'm sure it's on your watch! Thanks & cheers! Franamax (talk) 04:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

What you did looks fine to me. Somebody else had really screwed things up, which was what I was trying to fix. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 12:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Eisenhower

To my great surprise, you are right that his birth name was in fact David D. Eisenhower. I was indeed hasty to label the change vandalism. However, he rose to prominence and was elected president as Dwight D. Eisenhower, and so that is the correct name to use in this context. Nevertheless, I appreciate your correction, and I will try to be more careful in the future. Plazak (talk) 14:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of Montreal islands...

I've got islands on the brain, too. Did you happen to see Hochelaga Archipelago? It's an article I've taken on. (I even created an article for it on citizendium, which will of course never b seen by anyone). As a lifelong Montrealer, I'd never even heard of this until I came across the article. I got so excited I created a cat for it, too. Speaking of which, should BC's own Gulf Islands should be added to Category:Archipelagoes? Are they considered an archipelago? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The feds apparently think so. I don't see a wiki article to add to the category, needs more clicking! Franamax (talk) 04:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I just added the category. Cheers, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Good man, I was still looking at windows full of wiki-text trying to figure out how to structure it all without getting CSD'ed! Should it have a master article the same way as Hochelaga does? Gulf Islands seems to cover it. I'll try to copy the format if you don't do it first. Excellent work.
I'm gonna concentrate on spilling forth my canoe idea for your consideration, might take an hour though :) Franamax (talk) 04:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Mirrors & Forks

I remember a while ago hearing people that would contact these guys about forked material without attribution, but it may have been on the mailing list... if I don't get a response, I'll either post to the mailing list or just contact them myself. Either way, I'll let you know. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 14:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

No, sorry, I don't generally copy/paste code multiple places. —Random832 00:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Browser errors

Thanks; very kind. I'll do some digging in this direction. I took the twinkle error back to the Twinkle owner so hope that that one will be solved that way. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Emailed. Don't feel obliged - only if you have time. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh - and the errors were from IE7 ... you may need to know that? --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Whoa

Looks like they're all Twinkle errors, having just removed Twinkle from my monobook.js. User:AzaToth has indicated that he's not interested in getting Twinkle compliant with IE, fullstop. So perhaps that's as far as we need take it. I was merely concerned that all IE users were getting the same errors. if it's just twinkle users, well, they should be using firefox anyway :). Thanks nevertheless. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Attima

Yes I do know him and no he doesn't have an article. I take it that you know him as well. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 11:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Reference sections

Just would like to let you know: you could spare yourself some work by not taking time to add those reference sections to Kansas articles. We're in process of getting a bot to do it. Of course, not to say that it's not good to do it :-) but you might not want to bother with so many little edits. Nyttend (talk) 05:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I just did that one county then posted to WP:USA suggesting a bot. Good to know you're already on it. Franamax (talk) 06:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Montreal

There have been controversies in the past in the article. Both Kinshasa and Abidjan are more populated than Montreal. It all depends how you count French speakers (1s language speakers only? or also 2nd language speakers?). What's uncontroversial is that Montreal is the second-largest French speaking city in the Western world (neither Lyon, nor Brussels, nor Marseille, nor Québec City have as many inhabitants as Montreal). Any worldwide statement is controversial due to Kinshasa and Abidjan. Godefroy (talk) 04:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Help desk help pileon

And an additional comment; if you'd like a template to be clickable, so that people can go to the page without it being transcluded, then include the parameter prefix {{tl|}}. For example, {{tl|helpme}} results in {{helpme}}. Sorry to keep bothering you! Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! 05:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Love the pile-on, gives me a chance to learn and keep asking questions! To wit:
I thought I'd be able to use the tl template in this post but it seems to insist on injecting "Template:" in before my "User:Franamax...". What's up with that?
And why, when you click to my test template (which needs two parameters) does it look so funny: User:Franamax/Test2? Permalink is here in case I keep changing it. Thanks for the help! Franamax (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
In the case of a page with a User: prefix, use {{ul}}; for example, {{ul|Franamax/Test2}} creates Franamax/Test2. Also, I'm not sure about the template page itself; it seems to work for me when I use all the parameters. Hope that helps, and feel free to contact me if you have anything else that needs answering. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! 00:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for letting me know. It is appreciated! :-) — BQZip01 —  19:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for the message. I was still working on that. I have posted a diff now. Thanks, Johntex\ 22:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Information condensed in the User RfC per your request. Peruse at your leisure. BTW, just for the sake of feedback, better? — BQZip01 —  22:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, as much as I disagree with the comments in that section, the discussion of the content shouldn't have been there in the first place. Good move. — BQZip01 —  23:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
IMHO, it doesn't matter where incivility happened. Users cannot go around making up lies about other users just to discredit them; personally, I believe that is one reason (however not the only reason) my RfA had such a hard time. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. I'll go with consensus, no prob, but lies are another thing altogether and they poison the discussion process.
As for a beer, I'm there...figuratively of course I have to get to Canada first...and I'm from Texas! we sell our beer by the KEG! :-)
If you want to serve as a mediator between CC and I, I would be happy to have you do so and show us the error of our ways. — BQZip01 —  23:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi Franamax, thanks for your message. I'm feeling pretty good about the latest developments. I'm looking forward to BQ coming back online and seeing CC's offer. Hopefully we can end this whole sordid affair soon and get on with happier and more productive things. I thank you for your attempts to help the situation. Best, Johntex\ 15:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hope your suggestion of statistical correlation between myself and Samiharris was kidding

Anyway, the idea of telling new spouses apart by the methods now being applied by ArbCom, is very droll. Weiss went to India to get married, and his "sock" who did his bio, went with him. Well shut me up. The two must be the same guy. --Sherlock. SBHarris 04:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply crossover, I always type too slow! Franamax (talk) 04:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Mine was intended to be a humorous question, with a little extra humour on the statistics. Yours is a valid and serious point however I think there is a concerted effort here to avoid speculation on real-life identities. Incongruous as that is in any case where reality comes into play on Misplaced Pages, especially in this case where real identities and activities are at the heart of the matter and being alluded to in the evidence, I will always defer to Wikipedians' attempts to skirt the issue. I think you raised a valid point, and I think that point was shut down with equal validity. There was nothing particularly silly about it other than the entire silliness of pseudonymity. That happens to be the basic foundation of the project within which we all must work, regardless of how silly it gets. We are each and all free to create our own projects with more accommodating rules. I'm sticking with this one.
Anyway, I was just making a little joke about names and statistics, three hours after I read your post yesterday it hit me. No seriousity intended. Cheers!
  • Okay, no harm, no foul. Anonymity has been the source of much evil on Misplaced Pages, as well as (ironically) some of the passion of Wikipedians to write about other people's lives (BLP) and other people's livelihoods (articles on publically traded companies, which which there isn't nearly as much consideration shown as in BLP). This is madness. These problems are not going to be solved with WP:V and WP:Whatever. Opinions will always differ. That's why related wiki problems in arguing about contentious topics like religion or ethnicity or whether or not JFK was killed by one sniper, have to be presented as in court trial, with a concerted attempt to be (somewhat) fair to all points of view (except extreme minority ones). Even the Catholics choose a devil's advocate, when putting somebody up for Sainthood. The worst criminals get defence attornies, and so on. Misplaced Pages has not learned this at all levels, and that's why the Overstock-type wars are destined to keep going, and to get worse. Why can't everybody see this??

    The stock market operates on ads, which are closely kept track of by the SEC and FTA. In opposition are consumer reports and stock analysts. Nobody censors anybody, really. If you wish to "pump and dump" a crummy penny stock, there are many ways to get around the rules. And naked short selling is a potent way to counteract such bull. We need both. So, we should discuss both fairly. If Overstock needs a puff page, with a summary of criticism on it, AND a separate criticism page, with a summary of the puff page, well, that's within policy. We did it with the Apollo moon landings and the Apollo moon landing hoax accusations. What prevents us from learning the lessons we learned THERE, and applying them HERE? SBHarris 05:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The whole thing...

...is going to end up RFAR, based on this. Lawrence § t/e 07:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Drop it man, drop it. It's the talk page of an RFC, brought after an MFD, brought after an RFA, one huge piece of drama. Some ANI's in there and a BMF besides. There's enough rope out there, let it form its own noose. One thing I've learned around here, there's always someone else to take up the battle if the cause is right.
What will be the Arb finding? All members of the community should conduct themselves accordingly? Just let it go, there will be better times. Franamax (talk) 07:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I'm dropped, trust me. Either a one-way flame out, a mutual one, or a community-enforced or Arb-enforced "stay away from each other" solutions will come of it all. This was just a last observation. Lawrence § t/e 07:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
OK that's good to hear. I do agree that the "this" you link above is very disappointing, I expressed that elsewhere. Lets pick a bench where we can sit and watch the fire, I'll see if there's any beer left in the cooler. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 07:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Muhammad (no images)

An editor has nominated Muhammad (no images), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Muhammad (no images) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 14:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Broken Link

Thanks for catching that. Yes, this edit fixes it properly. Cheers, --Be happy!! (talk) 21:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

I appreciate the catch. Darn frustrating, to be sure, and I certainly don't like leaving a mess for others to clean up. Thanks again. --Ckatzspy 07:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review of Category:Wikipedians who support Hezbollah

Hi. I noticed you took part in the debate at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Hezbollah userbox and I was wondering if you might want to participate in a debate I have started at deletion review of this category and accompanying userboxes here.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 02:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Responded. Franamax (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Betacommand RfArb statement

Nice statement! Do you think it would be helpful to provide links or diffs, especially to stuff not mentioned or linked by others? One thing, BC and BCB are pretty clear, but you might want to make clear who MMN is. Carcharoth (talk) 09:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of PM'ing you before posting that, to be sure I wasn't being a complete idiot, so thanks. I'm relatively sure everything I spoke of is clear in the minds of at least one of the involved persons, at this point I'd prefer to strike any item challenged rather than defend it. It's a request for Arb, I'm trying to provide some background for the Arb's to accept/decline, they can make their own decision on unsupported allegations. I don't really want to make a career out of assembling cogent diff's for a case soon to be rejected. (Note my "happily uninvolved" header) I'll add a little disclaimer to clarify things. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 09:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

On Beta

Thanks for the note. I don't know if I appreciate being lumped in an "I hate Beta" crowd, when that's not the case for me, and for many--if not most--of the critics. But here's my thoughts: at one time, I thought perhaps there was a way forward outside of arbcom. In the last week or two, Beta has convinced me there's not. If there isn't some kind of sanction saying, "Here's how you have to treat people, and how you have to use your bot in the community" there's no way Beta will change. He has reached a point where he seems to feel like he has a kind of special user status, and that needs to be dealt with, in my view. What are your thoughts on the whole thing? Bellwether C 14:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

My apology for any insult I may have inadvertently made has been placed on your talk page.
One thing in particular that has struck me is the massive confusion resulting from so many interested parties commenting on so many different issues, to the point where no one issue ever seems to get addressed. I would have suggested creating some kind of structure to segregate the issues: if you want to complain about Beta's civility, press 1; if you want to question bot policy, press 2; if you want a better non-free use warning template, press 3; please do not mash the keypad.
It looks like this is headed to Arb in any case, which is unfortunate. I think the whole mish-mash of issues is going to happen there too, only writ large. Franamax (talk) 07:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Other options

I've been working on images now for a couple of months and thigns just seem to have gotten worse. I've racked my brain on this one, and don't see anything than an Arbcom at the end. Even WP:AN/B replaced in my mind, the WP:RFC process. Look at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution, is there anything other than binding arbitration that would make both sides happy? MBisanz 22:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I, unfortunately, have to agree with MBisanz here. I see problems on both sides, and, a community that is at present incapable of resolving the issues on it's own. An independant, unbiased third party really seems to be required at this time, otherwise it's just going to keep going on, and getting worse as time goes on. I'd be happy to help, however, in any way I can, if you need it. SQL 05:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks both for the response. I've been watching this for quite a while and positions have become quite entrenched. It looks like it will go to ArbCom anyway (I go away for a day and the whole place goes to hell:). However, I'm not really clear on what exactly ArbCom is even going to resolve. Declare that BC has been uncivil? I think Beta could write that finding himself! Declare that BC has been provoked? I'll race ya to be the first to propose that FoF. A list of "this issue must be resolved by the community"'s? Whether it's now or at AC, what are the several issues, how do we separate them, how do we resolve each one? Thanks for your comments anyway! Franamax (talk) 08:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Offer of help

I should be OK with the non-free images. My worklists are in the page history at User:Carcharoth/Image clean-up galleries (and the talk page). I imported a load of image names from some categories, so should be able to work from that, and the contribs of the admins who deleted or ImageRemovalBot, to identify the article where it isn't obvious. I want to concentrate on book and magazine covers (I actually think there is a good case for first edition magazine and book covers, rather than the generic "any old cover" that is used at the moment - purely because there will, in general, be more that can be mentioned in the article about first edition covers, and because they will usually become public domain before any of the other possible covers). I also do historical images. Speaking of which, one of the categories I never got hold of a list for is discussed here. I don't think it is possible to find out what the images were in Category:Denver Public Library images that got deleted (if any), but maybe you could look through Morven's image uploads to see if you can find which ones got deleted? Or any other ideas you might have? Carcharoth (talk) 10:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, scrub that last. He has a very small upload list. I'm checking through it myself. Will add to my worklist. Could you consider how to find other images in that category that other people may have uploaded? Carcharoth (talk) 10:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this is what you were looking for. Ping me about the other questions if I forget. Carcharoth (talk) 01:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

On April 1

You'd probably want to do it with javascript, since with the other way to do it (parser functions) you run into caching problems. However - I'd also like to say that this is probably not a particularly good idea. --Random832 (contribs) 03:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick(!) response to this, even before I could clarify I meant Site Notice (which is overlapping UTC date on Talk:Main Page btw).
When you say not a good idea, do you mean: operation-wise; within the context of the recent discussions; or as a potential opener for wider disruption? You can see here for some of my views, I (really, really) like to laugh but I do recognize some limits. The recent activity doesn't seem to me to be just all good fun. Franamax (talk) 04:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hollow Point Sniper Hyperbole

That is great but I can't find this album. I must have. the_undertow 05:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is great. I've only heard it on edge.ca, which I still listen to because here in Vancouver where I've moved, they mix in too much crap. (&beware edge plays a solid rotation of BeastBoyz lamely for some reason) I think USS is the new emergence of Newfie hip-hop or something, "I'se the bye that builds the boat" is a really well known Newfie folk song, and they cite Bonavista and moose. And there's a utube vid from the Cameron House! That's a down'n'dirty Toronto spot, I think this is discovery phase right now. Franamax (talk) 05:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
init srch: eml to stat mus dir re alb nm. rslt as avail. Franamax (talk) 06:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Update on the "flaming drink" question

I just thought I'd tell you (Franamax, StuRat, hydnjo, Atlant) how the flaming drink thing went. Well, mixed results. It's all made, but sometimes it works and some times it does not. What makes it extra odd, is that it works 100% of the time for me, but only about 50% for the girl that has to do it. So far, three shows with an audience and it only lit once. UGHH!!!

What I did: I made a fire place poker out of mostly thin PVC pipe. In the handle is a gas grill starter with wires going inside the pipe. Franamax - You mentioned the handle idea and I had already thought of that, but I didn't want to steer people towards what I was already thinking. I guess it's just a case of great minds thinking alike. ;-)

All of it is painted with "Hammered" spray paint made for outside plastic furniture. Here's a shot of it close up without the flame. http://wonderley.com/shows/2008/FarmersDaughter/Photos/Page01/shots/2008-04-17~069.jpg That's me on the couch. In the sort of V shaped tip is the igniter at the tip and the other wire coming at an angle. My invention sparks 99% of the time.

In the coffee mug is a metal jigger that I raised to the level of the top of the mug with a piece of PVC pipe. That was a mistake. I made the level of the jigger come to the level of the top of the cup so that the most amount of the flame would be visible. It should be raised, but not all the way to the top. I have to pretend to drink from this cup and the jigger (which gets scolding hot) is hard to NOT touch if the jigger is too high.

I scuffed up the inside of the mug and the other side of the jigger to get the glue to stick to it. The fact that the jigger is metal does not appear to have any effect on the spark.

In the jigger was originally only about 1/16 of an inch of "Golden Grain" booze - 95% alcohol. At my house, it ignited every time. But, not for Cheryl. I later thought about it was having it on my kitchen counter. That's higher up so I was holding the poker at more of an angle on the mug rather than straight down. So, we changed the jigger to about an half inch on alcohol. Soon before going on stage with it, she moves some of it on the side of the jigger for even more surface area.

When we do get a flame the poker flames a little as well and she blows it out. That actually looks great. The idea of adding salt is awesome - Thanks Atlant. However, I had no luck dissolving salt in the alcohol. I warmed up some alcohol with having hot water all around it in a thin glass and stirred a lot of salt in it. I then let it settle some and used a syringe with a wide tip to suck up some of the alcohol from the middle thinking I'd get the best alcohol with dissolved salt that I could. It did not appear to make any difference in the color of the flame or the ability to light it. However, we put salt in a sugar bowl. Once lit, putting a pinch of "sugar" in the flaming drink was an awesome effect.

I also tried freezing some of the booze so that the 5% that was not alcohol would be solid and use the 100% alcohol that was left - after it warmed back up and it made no difference. In fact, whatever the 5% that wasn't alcohol, appeared to be unfreezable as well.

Thanks again for all of your ideas. If you want to see more about the show, visit Wonderley.com --Wonderley (talk) 09:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

John Allan Brown

Discussion moved to Talk:John Allan Broun

The article is at John Allan Broun. Discussion moved to the talk page as suggested. Hope you like the article! Carcharoth (talk) 23:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

More unreliable typography on that medals page! Turns out that "J. I. Hirst" was in fact "T. A. Hirst", who is Thomas Archer Hirst! Sorry, I said I'd keep these back for a list, but it is part-annoying and part-exciting when finding a mistake like that. And better hold off on the e-mails. "Henry Nottidge Maseley" is really Henry Nottidge Moseley. Carcharoth (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
How very amusing and yet disturbing. I would just automatically assume the Royal Society website would be definitive in all aspects, and it turns out they're doing bong hits like everyone else on the web! Luckily their underlying records seem reliable. Let me know when you've finished any review you might be doing, then I can summarize the errors when/if they respond. Maybe they'll just link to us instead :) Franamax (talk) 00:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
No worries. And thanks for the Ref Desk help. I actually knew about Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Resource Exchange, but assumed everyone else did as well... :-/ I don't use it much, because if I did, I would be forever using it! :-) I tend to ask people with access to do the editing themselves, though the ocassional resource ends up in my inbox (only about 2 or 3 papers over the last few years). Carcharoth (talk) 06:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Vancouver Meetup 2008

Sorry, but being in Courtenay, and having no personal vehicle, I'm way out of range. --  Denelson8306:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned ref's

Hi. I responded here. Cheers. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Image moving

Firstly, I doubt our CSD tagging is quick enough to delete it, but, when you re-upload, adding {{keepLocal}} should deter most people until its deleted from commons, at which point it can be removed. Just make sure not to add {{NowCommons}}, which will point the bot at the image. MBisanz 21:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Vancouver Page

Of course you do not see that as a problem. Have you heard of what are "birds of a feather"? Thank God I do not live in Vancouver anymore. It is all yours and you guys can continue to make the Vancouver article "tourist-perfect". Jafarw (talk) 02:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Picture box stuff

Hi Franamax, I'd like to help a bit with the LOC images. Unfortunately, although I've done lots of work with Creative Commons and public domain images, I have essentially zero experience when it comes to fair use. For example, with this: Image:Davidson Dunton.jpg, why is a FUR even required if the image can be used for any purpose? I don't understand the problem. Can you point me to examples of FURs that would be suitable for these kinds of pictures? If it's more work to explain this than to do it yourself, do let me know - I won't be offended :) Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 19:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Clayoquot, thanks for the offer of help. Here is the deal, as far as I can figure it out. Yes, LAC is saying that use of the image has no restrictions but that's not the end of it. They are retaining copyright, and further they only grant use with written permission and they don't allow images to be modified (see here, which is admittedly confusing, LAC probably has big arguments internally about that too :).
In any case, if the work is not completely free, there is a question about whether it can be on Commons at all, if you read through this mail thread, Commons has decided to take the safer course and remove the images.
That's OK, we can always fall back to English Misplaced Pages (a US corporation), where we can claim "fair-use" protection, where the image is unique and so important that we have to use it to give our readers a proper understanding of the topic. However, in order to put a non-free image onto en:wiki, it has to have a proper license and a fair-use rationale for each place it is used. My understanding is that, if we want to use other people's property, we have to have a good reason and make it clear to viewers that it is a copyrighted image.
In the case of Image:Davidson Dunton.jpg, the license template claimed that "Redistribution, derivative work...is permitted", which is contradicted on the (confusing) LAC website. I replaced that with a different license tag and FUR, we'll see if it flies or not. This is not all that different from copying a TV station logo, if we use it in the article on the TV station itself, there's not much they can say about it - and as long as we don't draw a moustache on D. Dunton and don't add it to List of Formula One drivers, if I understand the US law correctly, we can make limited use.
Hope that helps, I suggest to try one, use {{Non-free historic image}} and {{historic fur}} as I've done, then we see what happens! Franamax (talk) 20:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. I'm so sorry, despite my intentions I think the chances of me getting to this this week or next are just about nil. Just way too busy and I'll also be travelling. Good luck though! May the Force be with you! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 04:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
No sweat, I'm still on the steep part of the learning curve anyway. If I can figure out some comprehensible guidelines, I'll go to CWNB, otherwise I'll just keep plugging away. I'm getting some good expertise with images anyway - like for instance, it looks like we're not going to be able to show pictures of recent prime minsters unless someone will give them away for free. Have a good trip! Franamax (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to say hai

Tinucherian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend or a new friend. Cheers, and happy editing! -- TinuCherian - 09:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

==Image copyright problem with Image:Igor Gouzenko hooded.jpg==

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Hi Franamax!
We thank you for uploading Image:Igor Gouzenko hooded.jpg, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Misplaced Pages.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 23:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talkcontribs) 15:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Bonavista

Because the plain title Bonavista is a disambiguation page which isn't supposed to be linked to directly at all, not even on talk pages, unless for some reason the dab page is itself the intended topic of discussion. Proper disambiguation maintenance doesn't leave talk pages uncorrected just because they're talk pages. Bearcat (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you seriously think talk pages are so inviolable that a link that isn't even pointing to the right page for the context of the conversation still has to be left as a link to the wrong page? Bearcat (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Getting your Misplaced Pages Software

Hey, impressive your cleanup of havana. How can I get your software? --Iroko (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fluoridation

Thanks for your message. Yes, I wanted to check out those websites. The government policies may be stated elsewhere. Better to source straight to the governments. What also does not emerge from the list is that some governments don't fluoridate the water because the natural levels of fluorides are quite high anyway. But I'm off on wikibreak for a bit now, so unless you want to return to the fray it will have to wait. Posting a message on the fringe theories noticeboard would attract a number of fair-minded editors. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Circles

Anything in commons:Category:Plain_circles that floats your boat? MBisanz 07:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I made a hack job of some circles and the gears, its at Image:Bag-test.png for as long as it stays alive. If it's gone by the time you read this, I cam email it. Basically, a grey circle with a bit of a green circle inside, then the gears. It's not really what I was thinking about, but something like that. Feel free to speedy it after you have a look, it's just a piece of crap :) Franamax (talk) 19:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

JzG RFAR merged with Cla68-FM-SV case

Per the arb vote here the RFAR on User:JzG is now merged with this case and he is a named party. Also see my case disposition notes there. — RlevseTalk21:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:revert to beta arb

Your edit summary shows misunderstanding. The edit was performed to the logs, not the text of the ArbCom case. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I checked that after my edit, you're right as to the closed case. However I don't think you're justified in changing anothers edits, as opposed to adding your own comment or asking a clerk to modify the log. I was thinking of self-reverting because of my edit summary, I decided to let my edit (reverting your edit) stand regardless. If you want I can self-revert, then re-revert with a better summary - then you can revert me :) Franamax (talk) 14:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
If you have a new or different reason for the edit, then don't self-revert on my account. It's no biggie to me ... the arbs aren't daft after all, but permitting such commentary in what's supposed to be a log of blocks and unblocks sets a bad precedent. I left a note with User:Daniel, and as he will have to deal with such stuff in future, he can deal with this. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm just touchy about changing another editors signed comments, to me my specific contribs with my name attached are sacrosanct, I'll live or die by them. My unsigned, ie main or wikispace edits, tear them apart though - which happens anyway :) Leaving it with a clerk is wise, you're likely right in what you say, but Daniel can figure it out. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 14:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
See my note here. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
See Deacon? I told you that you were likely right! :) All is well. Franamax (talk) 15:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Your WP software tools

Just been reading your user page. Am very interested in test driving your software tools. Thanks.  – ukexpat (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

List of distinct cell types in the adult human body

If removing the red links to show the article does not exist is still bothering you, you could always put them somewhere in Misplaced Pages:Requested articles. Hopefully you've been able to keep control since the original occurrence. ;) --Emesee (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, though I may end up stubbing them myself, those are some awfully long lists at Requested Articles :) I do need to get back to that list, it tops google for "human cell types" and "human cells" but its lost it's number two spot for "human cell" - somthing must be done! Franamax (talk) 06:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Neat tool

I saw your note at Possibly useful tool about User:Franamax/Ucontribs. I agree that it is quite interesting, but if it is all the same to you I'd rather not be listed there - I like to keep track of stuff I contribute to more focused on article quality drives and such. Thanks for your efforts, Cirt (talk) 05:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Done! Franamax (talk) 05:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I came across a link for the tool, and was wondering if you would be kind enough to run it on me? Thank you, regards Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 08:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Undeleted Commons:WikiProject Canada

Well after much controversy, the Commons:WikiProject Canada is back up again to see what can be made of it. ...I left a note on your commons talk page as well. I wasn't sure which place you check. SriMesh | talk 01:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Invite to review a set of articles

Hi there. You participated in this ANI thread. I picked out the names of some editors I recognised, or who had extensive comments there, and I was wondering if you would have time to review the articles mentioned in the thread I've started here, and in particular the concerns I've raised there about how I used the sources. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 09:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarism guideline

Thanks for your comments at my talk page. I've proposed we create a separate plagiarism guideline (or rather, how to detect, deal with and avoid it). Please contribute at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)#Misplaced Pages:Plagiarism. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)