Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Worm That Turned (talk | contribs) at 16:13, 23 August 2011 (→opinion: Reply to Sasha). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User	Talk	Articles	To Do	Toolbox	Subpages	DYK	Awards

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message!

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Talkback

Opinion

In my opinion, this person has not remained civil. Do you agree? They called my comment "stupid" here They told me to "keep off their talk page." If I am wrong, sorry. Puffin 17:05, 11 August 2011 (UTC) Your input is no longer needed, the issue has been resolved. I used maturity to resolve the dispute. Puffin 17:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

You modified a page which consisted of Kudpung's advice for people who wanted to be administrators. The information you added was contentious and you were in no place to do so. Please remember to assume the assumption of good faith. Failure to do so causes problems as you have just seen. In addition, Kudpung did not call your comment stupid. Ryan Vesey Review me! 17:16, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

First of all, I was jut trying to help, in no way trying to cause a dispute, which makes you contradict Nev's comment on Kudpungs talk page which said that they were not trying to accuse me of having malicious intentions. Secondly, I do not believe that Kudpung assumed good faith and therefore it was impossible for me to assume to assume good faith. Kudpung did call my comment stupid. May I quote from the edit summary "Replying to stupid comment." Thank you. Puffin 17:28, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

First, the fact that you should not have made the edit does not mean that I think you had malicious intentions. Ok, I guess I missed the edit summary; however, I agree with Kudpung. A comment of "WP:AGF", especially in the light of the essay I cited in my previous comment, does nothing to help the encyclopedia and can only escalate matters. Ryan Vesey Review me! 17:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I have a reply to this comment, but I do not want a lengthy discussion over a silly mistake. Thank you, the discussion has now ended. Puffin 17:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Request an RFA nomination

I noticed some editors who were wary of going to another editor they didn't know and asking for a nomination. Maybe there should be a specific section or page for editors who believed they were ready and were looking for an interested person to write a nomination for them. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

It wouldn't work. I know it's a nice idea but if you look at things like WP:ER - they don't get looked at as much as you'd hope. Also, it's likely to be filled up with editors who want the power of adminship, but are unwilling to put in the effort looking into the responsibilitiy - similar to a large proportion of the editors in Category:Misplaced Pages administrator hopefuls. (There's 1500 editors in there!) Worm · (talk) 08:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Infobox musical artist

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox musical artist. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Question on bot usage

What is the purpose of a bot that is not automated? Is there any different from a user controlling a bot which uses AWB and a user using AWB themselves? On a similar note, why don't all bots run constantly? Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

That's an interesting lot of questions, and I'm probably not the best person to answer them for you - I expect you'll get a better response chatting to someone more familiar with bot policies, I know User:ErrantX has been looking into bot's recently, but anyone who hangs around the bot owner's noticeboard should be able to help.

What I do know is from an incident recently regarding User:Porchcorpterbot. As I understand it, a bot that is not automated is not a bot. There is no difference between a user controlling a bot using AWB and a user using AWB. However, you can (if approved) set up a bot with no editorial oversight to run completely automated using AWB. It must be approved though.

As for why don't all bots run constantly, well, many run from a person's computer and so they will only run when turned on. Also, some work by downloading database dumps, doing analysis and then running based on that - it's not a constant situation. Worm · (talk) 09:35, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Bad vision

Dear Dave,

I re-read my talk page finally with some attention (and rest and reading glasses). I am very sorry that I did not respond appropriately and immediately.

Please email me ASAP and tell me what's up.

In solidarity,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 04:21, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Establishing notability

Hi Worm! :)

I have a question, could you please have a look at this article draft I'm working on, and tell me if I'm on the right track in establishing this persons notability...it's knowhere near completed, but I plan on completing it soon, with more sources. Thanks :) -- MelbourneStar☆ 13:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

It's not exactly the sort of topic I'd consider "encyclopedic" but you're doing a great job. Carry on like that, especially with decent sources, and even I wouldn't be able to disagree with his notability! Good luck :) Worm · (talk) 13:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Made my day. Thank You very much Worm! :) -- MelbourneStar☆ 13:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

RfA

Do you think it might be a better idea to either merge/add your Misplaced Pages:RfA reform 2011/Minimum requirement into Misplaced Pages:RfA reform 2011/Candidates, hor to move it to Misplaced Pages:RfA reform 2011/Candidates/Minimum requirement ? I'm getting the impression that some people and newcomers to the project might not be aware of the extensive research and discussion we have made already on this, and won't look at it in connection with your proposal. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't it then be added to Misplaced Pages talk:RfA reform 2011/Minimum requirement? The project page seems to be for data only. Ryan Vesey Review me! 00:41, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I did think about moving it, but as Ryan says, I think this is more a proposal on it's own, I link heavily to the data within my proposal, but they're piped, so I might change it to make it more obvious. Worm · (talk) 07:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Pre-RFA proposal

I have drafted my idea for a Pre-RFA here. Care to take a look and help me expand it before I show the rest of the task force? Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Have you gotten a chance to look at this? Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:14, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I've had a look, but I want to dedicate a decent amount of time to helping you sort it out / coming up with some decent comments and suggestions. As all I've had is small snippets of time, I've just sort of... left it for now. I've got two free evenings this coming week, and I should be able to have a good look then :) Worm · (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:RfA reform 2011/Unsuccessful candidates' edits‎

Thanks for updating this table with the missing data. I admit I'm not very good at this sort of thing. One of the things we also cannot show are the X-tools edit count on the day of transclusion if the RfA was SNOWED before the stats for the day had been gathered, and it happened before I creted the table. I now try to update this table regularly on a new-RfA basis and recover the count for the day if had not been posted to the RfA tp. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

If you aren't able to get the results using X!'s edit counter, try using wikichecker. Put in the person's username and tell it to analyze all edits, then scroll your cursor over the graph to the date of their RFA. Ryan Vesey Review me! 13:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

No problems, as it helped my proposal :D - Ryan's idea is pretty good too, Wikichecker does have past information, when it works! Worm · (talk) 08:55, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Citation Needed

Hi, do you know a link for where i can find a list of all articles with citation needed tags? Thanks Jenova20 14:37, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Category:Articles lacking sources andCategory:Articles lacking reliable references are both areas that need more citations. Category:Articles with unsourced statements is the specific category you are looking for. If you enjoy adding citations to articles, consider joining Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Unreferenced articles. Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I even managed to answer without moving my lips fingers :) Ryan's exactly right - hope that answers everything! Worm · (talk) 14:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank both of you very much.

Worm i just looked into Misplaced Pages's help pages on COIN (Conflict of interest) and suggest you add it to your adoption school since it seems an important one to miss out.

What do you think?

Thanks again Jenova20 11:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree it's an important point, one I find myself constantly telling people about on the IRC help desk, but I must say that my adoptees thusfar haven't have COI issues. I'll probably add it as an additional lesson if/when I take on an adoptee with that specific issue. In my experience, the majority of CoI combines with WP:SPA, so they don't generally want to be adopted! Worm · (talk) 11:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree, i had personal run-ins with a certain someone who i felt was biased and accused of such so i could have done with knowing about COIN, not that would have made any real difference, it just would have helped to know about it i feel.

Thanks Jenova20 12:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

More template help

I have tried just about everything to make {{wikify}} have parameters to explain what is wrong. You can see from the history at User:Ryan Vesey/Template sandbox that I have run out of ideas. I would like for there to be parameters such as |html |lead |sections |infobox. When the parameters are in place, the template would read something like "An editor has specified issues to be with the html markup" or "An editor has specified issues to be with the lead and infobox". Any ideas? Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:14, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

There's a few ways you can do this. Something like the {{Multiple issues}} template would be the obvious way. It's not easy though, - there's lots of lines of code, and you'd probably want to create the sub-template too, so that it can be displayed properly. The other options is to have un-named parameters, which just render directly, however that leads itself to problems as there's no validation and someone could come along with "An editor has specified issues to be with GAAAAAYYYYYY!!!! LOLZ!!!1!!!!1!1!" ... and all sorts of other WP:BEANS problems. Worm · (talk) 07:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello Worm! I was just asking, would you be able to tell me, or in fact please do something about this red-link (Zyzz)...this page has been deleted several times, ages ago, but now it needs to be used as a redirect to this article (Aziz Shavershian) as "Zyzz" is his most notable name, and there is references on his article to corroborate that he was most notably known as Zyzz. The issue is, is that the red-link has been protect by an Administrator (?) and can't be made. Thankyou! -- MelbourneStar☆ 14:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Your wish is my command! Well done for doing such a good job with a very difficult topic. Worm · (talk) 14:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thankyou! -- MelbourneStar☆ 14:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors: Time to join pods

Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:

• Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
• Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
• Watching out for the class as a whole
• Helping students to get community feedback on their work

This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.

You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.

Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.

If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

PS: There are still a lot of student articles from the last term that haven't been rated. Please rate a few and update the list!

Page protection -- Urgent

Worm! Aziz Shavershian needs a page protection from Ips! Take a look at the history section...I'm still reverting...they won't stop! -- MelbourneStar☆ 03:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

184.44.149.60, which seems to have been the main problem, has now been blocked by Elockid, who has also semi-protected the page. Given that it's around 4:30am where Worm lives right now, WP:AIV might have been a better place to go (or even WP:RFPP or WP:BLPN). --Demiurge1000 (talk) 03:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, usually I would have manners, by saying "please" and "thank you" in my comments above, but the Ip's just kept on bringing in the vandalism...and I didn't have time to use manners, or even go to WP:RFPP or WP:BLPN. Sorry for the trouble and thank you :) -- MelbourneStar☆ 03:40, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

No worries. An important piece of advice is to stay calm in a situation like this. It's great to do the first revert of an obviously-BLP-infringing vandalism so fast, but once it's gone on for a while, then whether the time between the eighth and ninth reverts is thirty seconds or ten minutes, doesn't really matter very much. (Unless it's an election candidate the day of an election, or something.) Remember that, if you're sure the IP is completely in the wrong, then there's no way they can "win" just by clicking their mouse faster and faster - they are inevitably going to lose. Arranging for that to happen is something that can take five or ten minutes, so there's really no problem with going away and making a drink or a snack then coming back to do it (and often someone else will have dealt with it in the meantime, which is all the better.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 04:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Can you check the rationale for an image I uploaded.

I uploaded File:Allen Morris playing tennis at Wimbledon.jpeg a while ago and an editor has challenged the fair use rationale. Could you look at it and tell me what you think? Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:31, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

On a side note, the image I showed you way back in the adoption program File:Nair Collage.PNG is up for deletion now. Ryan Vesey Review me! 01:35, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

note

I just wanted to let you know that Djungarian hamster is now a GA. Thank you for your suggestions. I am now working on Phodopus. Puffin 16:53, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

TWINKLE Preferences

Hey WTT, long time, no see...how are things? You removed your post before I could respond. If you can remove the access to the vandalism button, please do. That would make everyone happy. Much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:42, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Just seen your edit summary, so scratch the above. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey Neutralhomer, all's well thanks. I spotted your situation, thought it was easy to fix, and then realised it wasn't! I'm having a look now, but I'm not sure if there's "per feature" turn off. I'll let you know if I can do it or not... Worm · (talk) 08:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Good to hear all is well. :) Let me know, either way, what you find out. Thanks! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:48, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I just cleared TWINKLE from my .js file. It's not worth the trouble. I do, though, appreciate your help on this. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For helping with the TWINKLE issue, I hereby award you this barnstar. Thank you for your help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you :) just a pity it didn't work! Worm · (talk) 09:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for your help though. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 09:33, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

opinion

Dear Dave,

please allow me to voice an opinion, which perhaps was not asked for, regarding the conflict with KW.

I think you have to decide whether you pursue this matter as an administrator or as an offended individual. If the former, please remember (cf WP:NOTPERFECT) that administrators should lead by example, and strive to resolve conflicts in a fast and peaceful manner, rather than resuscitate old conflicts. I am confident that in this case the best solution is to drop the matter completely and consider the conflict long resolved. This would give an example of good judgement for all the involved parties.

If the latter, perhaps you should emphasise (and reemphasise) this. Then at least you will not erode the status of admin-ship, which is mainly based on the faith most editors have (I hope) in the good judgement of admin-s.

Best regards, Sasha (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sodin/Sasha. Thanks a lot for coming to me to discuss this. I'm sure you've noticed that I've not been an administrator very long, and as such I'm certainly not reviewing his edits as "an admin" - that is, I have no intention to use administrator tools in this regard.

Furthermore, I'm not an offended individual. Nothing Kiefer has said to me has offended me in any way. That said, I have seen a pattern of edits which I believe show a level of disruption to the project, which if unchecked will cause larger issues in the future. I've tried to deal with this in a few different methods, but have found that whilst KW is willing to work on issues in the past, he does not appear as responsive now. As such, I believe the only remaining recourse is an RfC.

I'm curious to know why you believe we have an ongoing conflict though. To the best of my knowledge, my history with Kiefer is a discussion when one of my mentees PRODed a redirect, which was amicable. A discussion at my RfA, where he supported me. I admonished him when he went over 3RR, and although he did not take it very well, we drew a line under it. Finally, at ANI, where KW was upset with my comments, and the current RfC that I'm in the process of drawing up. I'm not involved in any topics that he edits, I also believe I'm objective regarding him personally as we've not had any disputes. Worm · (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)