Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AmandaNP (talk | contribs) at 03:07, 8 December 2009 (re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user will be going through two GA Reviews today, and will rereview any requests of previous GAs in the next few days. --MWOAP (talk) 22:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, AmandaNP, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  - Ahunt (talk) 01:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Question

{{helpme}}
Where did you get wind of me?
What major groups on wiki are you part of?
This helpers group, how does it work/what does it do?
Please reply soon Ahunt.
Thanks, MWOAP (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

We answer questions about the use of wikipedia and how to do things. If you would like to ask Ahunt a question, the better place to ask it is on their talkpage, as Ahunt may not be monitoring this page. --Terrillja _talk 02:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It just so happens because I started this page that I am still watching it. I saw your external link fix to CFB Goose Bay and just thought I would welcome you to Misplaced Pages, since no one else had done it before. Most of us try to be be welcoming to new editors, mostly because we need the help here making the encyclopedia better! - Ahunt (talk) 14:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

User Committed Identity

{{helpme}}
I cannot under stand the page on how to do a User Committed Identity. I just need to know what to do and what to put where. Can anyone help me? MWOAP (talk) 15:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

1. Pick a sentence that only you know the wording to
2. Find an online hasher (google Sha-256 generator)
3. Put your phrase into that and get the result
4. Put the resulting phrase (into a template) on your user page.

In short, that the process. - Jarry1250 17:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

You still have not received an answer by a Sysop so try to get more anti-vandalism edits and wait for one to reply on your request. Frozen4322 : Chat 19:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I will remove my last message, and do some more. Thanks, MWOAP (talk) 19:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I've declined your request at this time, without prejudice to future application. Sorry, and happy editing! Pedro :  Chat  23:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Danger (talk) 01:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: ArbCom Mentorship

Hey, MWOAP, sorry for the long delay. I've taken a look at your edits, and to be entirely honest, you don't have anywhere near enough experience yet. I can see that your account was registered back in 2007, but you've only been regularly editing since this year, and not very heavily at that. Arbitration Clerks are ideally users who have a wide range of experiences on the project, particularly within dispute resolution, and are users who have demonstrated that they hold the community's trust to be a dependable user. Clerks are also often administrators, as the tools assist in the execution of our duties. If this is something you'd like to get involved in at some point in the future, keep in mind that positions on the clerk corps are offered by the clerk corps based on a list of potential candidates we and ArbCom maintain. My advice to you would be to remain active, with particular attention to the "back-lines" duties, clearing out backlogs and the like. After a year or so, consider admin coaching or an RFA to gauge your standing in the community. Thanks for your interest. Hersfold 03:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Mil Palabras con sus dientes

Just a friendly note on Mil Palabras con sus dientes. I declined the speedy deletion request because it doesn't meet the definition of patent nonsense. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. My slip up there. I will try to be more careful. I understand the reasoning. --MWOAP (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

14th Street Viaduct (Hoboken, New Jersey)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 14th Street Viaduct (Hoboken, New Jersey), and it appears to be very similar to another Misplaced Pages page: 14th Street Viaduct (Hudson County, New Jersey). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Misplaced Pages:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I was moving a page. I thought I did it right. --MWOAP (talk) 21:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm clearing out the SCV listings for this day and came upon this particular article. Given your note here, it seems perhaps you may not fully grasp the attribution requirements for copying material from one Misplaced Pages article to another. While you noted the split at , attribution requires at minimum a direct link to the source article in the edit summary. (Something like "Material copied from ]" would do.) This creates an even worse situation, as the deletion of the article means that the attribution history is lost. Without that, the article is a copyright violation. Misplaced Pages's contributors don't release their text into public domain, but only grant permission for reuse if the licensing conditions (including attribution) are met. In a case like this one, it is better to simply move the page, which doesn't require copying & pasting material at all, but is a mechanical function that any autoconfirmed user can do (except where there's already a page at the destination point or the article has been protected against it.)

I've eliminating the copyright problem by restoring the deleted article and merging it into the new location for the text, 14th Street (Hoboken). But if you've moved articles or split them without proper attribution before, please let me know or take steps to provide proper attribution. Otherwise, we can't legally display it. :) -

I'll be watching your talk page for a time if you have any questions about this. -Moonriddengirl 13:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, ok, I didn't realize I screwed up this bad. I forgot about this article after I made the move. I saw the page of copying within wiki a few days ago when dealing with other page moves & stuff. I have not made this mistake on any other articles. The State that you left the article in as of now is awesome, and again I am so sorry about my screw up there. Thanks for you help. --MWOAP (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review of Windows Product Activation

{{helpme}} I just listed myself properly to be the first reviewer. Though on the talk page link to the GA assessment, someone has already posted there in progress of a review. Do I override this or what? --MWOAP (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Windows Product Activation

Just canceled request, I will just remove my name and go for another article. --MWOAP (talk) 22:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

(Cleared TB) ---Dough4872 01:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

GA review of CobraNet

MWOAP, thanks for your GA review of CobraNet. I have currently fixed all of the issues with the article that you pointed out, with the exception of the OR and NPOV issues (which I aim to tackle tomorrow evening). The only thing I disagree with you on is that the article has a long way to go to get to GA. I don't expect that the remainder of the issues you've listed will take very long to fix. I would urge you to place the GA review on hold for a few days while the article is being fixed. Hopefully, within a few days I can either cite or eliminate the OR and NPOV from the article. If there are any other remaining issues with the article that you haven't listed in your review, please let me know. Thanks! SnottyWong talk 03:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I have now fully addressed all of your comments on the GA review for this article. Please take a look at my comments on the GA review page, and review the changes in the article. Let me know if you have any further issues with this article. Thanks. SnottyWong talk 22:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Windows Product Activation GA Table Suggestion

On your GA review, you suggested using a table. Is this (User:Michaelkourlas/WPAT) the kind of thing you want?--Michael Kourlas 01:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I think it could have a little more, i.e. preinstalled oem vendor info, grace period applies to, etc

TB

TB removed. Author: COMPFUNK2 --MWOAP (talk) 23:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Fedora Project Review

I believe I have corrected the deficiencies you noted in the Fedora Project. Thank you for your review! --W4otn (talk) 01:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Fedora Project GA review

Hi there. Wanted to raise a couple of things about the GA review you've just undertaken at the above article. First, when concluding a review, don't clear from the GA review page the points you have raised in the course of the review. It is useful for the page to document what was wrong with the article and what got fixed. Second, while every reviewer has to interpret the GA criteria, I would not have thought this article was even close to GA status. A few examples of issues:

• Most of the (very few) references in the article are to internal company or project sources and may not meet either reliability criteria, or be considered independent of the subject.
• The bulk of the article comprises embedded lists, which are not ideal for the nature of the article. See Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria and WP:EMBED.
• Much of the list material reads like promotional text for the Fedora Project (for example "Printing to create a good printing experience on Fedora")
• Almost nothing in the "Subprojects & Special interest groups" section is referenced, and there is no indication why any of the detailed information is in any way notable.

I would in fact suggest it most likely that the entire article should be merged as a section of Fedora (operating system) or Red Hat. I will raise this at the GAN talk page, which may lead to the article going to the reassessment process, seeking delisting. If you've any queries, let me know. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't have time to read you message above, but if you think this is serious, PLEASE delist it for me. --MWOAP (talk) 03:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)