This is an archive of past discussions with M.O.X. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
< Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 > |
All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - 30 - 31 - 32 - 33 - 34 - 35 - 36 - ... (up to 100) |
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, did you actually click the link in my MFD of Wikipedia:April fools/April Fools' Day 2011? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 16:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Can you please specify the actual reason for deleting these abuse reports? The pages themselves don't hold many clues. And I don't really see the need for them to be speedied, either. A mass MfD would be easier for all concerned. --Closedmouth (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to remove the g6 tag, because there's no explanation and it's clearly not uncontroversial maintenance. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 20:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
.
Thanks! I uploaded the file too ;) —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 3:51pm • 04:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Mind you, the colour I've chosen for my wikilinks is much toned down, and I find the system much less obstructive. But one disadvantage is that I have to look very carefully to see the difference between the colours for "already visited" and "not visited yet". Hmmm. Maybe I'll find someone who can tell me how to make my "already visited" colour slightly purple, the way it used to be before the revamp last year. Tony (talk) 07:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Please be a little more careful, when reviewing requests at Files for upload. In this case you instructed the non-registered user to fill out a non-free rationale, when it's clear, that the image isn't eligible for non-free use, because the subject of it, Alberto Medina, is a living person. Armbrust WrestleMania XXVII Undertaker 19–0 00:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:ACC tool users' pledge during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Wifione ....... Leave a message 10:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. Please come by and voice your opinion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:33, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 4, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2011
Previous issue | Next issue
Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2011, the project has:
|
Content
|
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 02:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I see you added a WP:BARNSTAR, however there was no consensus to add it as far as I know. Quoting "If you would like a barnstar to be added to the list, please discuss it at WikiProject Wikipedia Awards talk page. Please don't add it without a consensus! Barnstars without consensus will be removed." Please discuss the addition first, thanks. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. A word to the wise. Re this edit and the others that you've been doing, you may as well call it quits now because they're all going to be reverted. Cheers. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 10:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Ah, I understand, however, some articles still retain the title in the infoboxes, despite the subject being deceased for a while. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 9:19am • 23:19, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Please don't delete the manual instructions. If X!'s tool is down, we're screwed without them. Plus, it's much easier to follow the manual instructions when closing large batches of files at once. It's my hope that we'll have lots of large batches to close. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:15, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/A la Nanita Nana. Thanks for pointing out the problem. Once I knew what it was, it was easy to fix. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure that 4 (four) votes counts as WP:SNOW - and leaving it open for only two hours? Whilst I am not sure that the RFA will succeed, I think you have been far too hasty. Secondly, if you are going to close it, then you must update the alphabetical and chronological list of failed RFAs. --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 10:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
While I agree that was unlikely to pass, these do need to run (at least) 7 days before closing, unless the nominator withdraws. I don't think it's worth restoring it (unless TonyTheTiger asks), but do watch the dates. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, one other thing - don't forget to notify the uploader and nominator. If X!'s tool doesn't include that, we'll need to change the instructions (I tend to go manual, out of habit). Honestly, I think you can get away with a lot of things I couldn't (because my actions on FS are going to be heavily scrutinised since I'm so active there), but it's not worth pushing it too much. (in particular, closing after one day? Tsk, tsk, naughty naughty, you'll probably get away with it, but don't do that again. =) ) Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
I want to reiterate what adam said this FS was only up to be discussed for a little under a day. While I doubt It would have failed please let things run its full 7 days. (Also when you are closing FSes please try to stay away from the ones you !voted on.) cheers --Guerillero | My Talk | Review Me 00:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
On a cheerier note, your nomination, O Canada, was the 200th Featured sound. Just totalled them up, and discovered we hit a milestone. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
File:U.S. Navy Band, Advance Australia Fair (instrumental).ogg <- Is this better? Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, this edit, deleted the Cornwallis image as it had a date in the image filename and also removed all the postage stamp images. Please watch out for how articles render after a format edit, Tom B (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi M.O.X. Just wondered if you would like to comment on the Bot template page where a discussion about the change of the icon that trial bots use has been started. I feel more input is required before consensus is reached. You are reciving this message as you are signed up for the RFC service. Thank you. Cj005257 (talk) 18:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC).
Hi, your Awards and associated links at the top of this page still refer to Fridae's Doom, which has been deleted. I'd fix them, but you're the most qualified to know where they should point! twilsonb (talk) 08:42, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi AA, when you tag a G6 for speedy delete you need to give a reason, because usually we don't know what you know about why the page should go. For example with Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Intro, perhaps you wanted to tag something else, and this was in use making CSD light up with pages that transcluded it. The "What links here" link is good to check if you think something is unused. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi M.O.X/Archive 10. I have now moved the RfA reform and its associated pages to project space. The main page has been updated and streamlined. We now also have a new table on voter profiles. Please take a moment to check in and keep the pages on your watchlist. Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:03, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
On 2011-APR-03, you made numerous date format edits, such as to O Canada. Perhaps you are not aware that Canada uses 3 date formats and the only one with any claim to strong national ties is YYYY-MMM-DD. The article used MDY for almost 10 years with nary an interruption. Per retain I have reverted your edit. I hope you have not changed other Canadian articles without considering this.--JimWae (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
You participated at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Fireside Chat 1 On the Banking Crisis (March 12, 1933) Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I was hoping you might comment at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/delist/Fireside Chat 1 On the Banking Crisis (March 12, 1933) Franklin Delano Roosevelt.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:38, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
See new file at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Address Before a Joint Session of Congress (February 24, 2009) Barack Obama (video).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
The Excellent User Page Award | ||
Really cool, colourful user page. Well done! Oddbodz (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC) |
I think your comments make a lot of sense. While it might not be on it's way to passing, I'm going to let it run it's course (we have 6 more days), and try to address the concerns of users like you in the long run. –BuickCenturyDriver 08:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Could you please review my changes based on your review? I did tweak the article a bit, but in general you don't need to have a citation for every sentence which I think was the heart of your A1 concern. If you need more info I can probably find the relevant links. Thanks! Kirk (talk) 13:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I have closed the discussion. The merge does not need administrator action, so you can do it. COpy the text etc to the main article with and edit summary that credits Resignation of Hosni Mubarak. Then Change Resignation of Hosni Mubarak to a redirect to Hosni Mubarak. |The talk page can stay as is. Do not nominate Resignation of Hosni Mubarak for deletion as it contains attribution history. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there, I know you and I have different positions on how closings should work at Featured Sounds, however I did want to point something out. Closing featured sounds that you also voted in, even if it's not a promotion, or even if there is a clear consensus, or even if the outcome is the opposite of your vote, is something that is strongly discouraged. Featured Sounds has smaller participation than other areas, and so it is susceptible to backlogs and low voting numbers, however as a featured process, it can and should be scrutinized and should be held to the highest standard possible.
If it's been 10 or so days, you've already voted, and a consensus is there, drop a note at the talk page and someone who hasn't voted will close it. If there isn't a consensus either way, letting it run a while longer can't hurt.
Now I know this isn't written down anywhere, so I really can't get angry with you, however in the future please this in mind. Thank you, Sven Manguard Wha? 22:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Not quite sure if you were done promoting, but don't forget to put
into WP:FS. In the historical section, under speeches Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, James. Thanks for attending to case.
I declare the problem chiefly resolved. You have my gratitude.
Only with the interest of learning, I have raised three objections to your mediation. I will be happy to receive an answer to them. I promise you that if I receive a convincing answer, I will leave the article well alone and will not bother its date style again.
I am more than happy to see the problem is resolved ... resolved without anyone unearthing my past, insulting me, calling me "equine necrosadist" and accusing me of [insert a bad behavior here]. Indeed I feel like this bird. If there is anything I can do for Mediation Cabal in return, please let me know.
Fleet Command (talk) 07:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Kudpung has asked me to 'nudge' some people .. as I'm an idle get, I'm just going through the entire Task Force list so my apologies if you didn't need a nudge! You can slap me about over on WP:EfD if you like :o) Straw polling various options: over here - please add views, agree with views, all that usual stuff. Pesky (talk) 12:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
looking to be adopted and I saw your profile on the adoption page! There is a ton to learn here and I want to make sure my contributions are done right. Azkurt (talk) 19:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)AZKurt
Thanks for getting the ruffles to the log, I was distracted by Yanni and forgot to do it. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:13, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I don't know if it's because of a script I use or a gadget I have enabled but I keep viewing the old version of the Copyright warning on the edit interface, yet when I log out and edit as an anonymous user I see the current version of the copyright warning. Originally, I thought the problem had something to do with my cache, but it turns out it has nothing to do with my cookies, cache or IE. On top of that when I go to Special:PendingChanges it shows "less than 1 hour" instead of the current MediaWiki message. It's the same for when I try to edit a fully protected page, I don't get the huge box warning instead I get a few lines of text, eg. This page has been protected to prevent editing, the reason follows (it's something along those lines). Why is that? —James (Talk • Contribs) • 4:38pm • 06:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi - when you tagged all those links in Peterborough many were inside the ((Wayback)) to link to archived copies of the pages, and others were there to record the original url from which the archived copy was taken. It seems to me that it's not really helpful to tag such links as dead. David Underdown (talk) 10:39, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I emailed you about membership of WMAu. Tony (talk) 11:16, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Could you please take another look? I'm trying to keep my tone as neutral as I can, and stick to the content, but I'm starting to find FleetCommand's comments and edit summaries increasingly disrespectful. --Gyrobo (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
I'm awfully sorry, but I can't help you very much, because I know nothing of ((dts)) — until I read that mediation page I was actually unaware of its existence... — and because, quite frankly, I believe that dispute is a bit silly: to edit war about how dates should be displayed is more than futile. As far as I'm concerned, this dispute could be resolved by tossing a coin, although, from a merely aesthetic standpoint I prefer Fleet Commands's solution as I deem it tidier.
If one has to follow policy, however, I'd say that the dates in the reference section should be left as they are now: YYYY-MM-DD and the date in the table as it is now: DD MM, YYYY, because the table is very short. So, I'd say that a good proposal to end the dispute would be to compromise: the table follows Fleet Command's DD MM, YYYY and the reference section follows Gyrobo's YYYY-MM-DD. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
When you mediate, you should always remember that, while it's up to the parties to reach an agreement, you're the one who guides them and tries to prevent them from digressing and wasting your time and theirs. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. I am confused by your close of this move discussion. My original request was to make the 1993 TV series the primary topic, and move it to "Grace Under Fire". I see there were two responses: one by an anon IP to rename it instead to "Grace Under Fire (1993 TV series)", and a regular user who just said "the 1993 series is clearly the primary topic". So why did you not make it the primary topic, and instead move it to the title that the anon IP suggested? Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:53, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
[1] Your edit seems to be an error. What happened? Gimmetoo (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 01:59, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes Michael? •Talk 07:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC) Yes Michael? •Talk 07:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. You tagged a speedy delete on Daniel P. Sebring (User:Dansebring); I tagged one on Dan Sebring (User:Bromberek). These articles are identical and were added minutes apart. Bromberek (Dansebring?) comments here: Talk:Dan Sebring. Not much up on sockpuppetry, but is this what we have? Acabashi (talk) 04:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi James, before history merging a major page like this you should seek consensus. You could do this via a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Abuse response. I saw that you closed a requested move. You should only do this if the outcome is very clear, otherwise you will suffer the consequences. It would be good if you contributed to the move discussion of perhaps 50 articles. This will show that you have a good grasp of dealing with controversy and the policy. WP:TITLE. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi James. Thank you very much for your kind words at my Wikipedia:Editor review/Worm That Turned, I really do appreciate them. I was wondering if you had spotted any areas to work on whilst perusing my edits. I'd appreciate the criticism. WormTT · (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi James,
You mentioned in your comment on the page I'm trying to publish,[[2]], that I should visit "referencing for beginnings". I did, but I would love some more detail as to what specifically I'm missing here (I'm getting a lot of push-back to get this page live so I'm grateful for any specific help). Have I incorrectly written the references, or are the references themselves (Inc. magazine, Entreprenuer magazine, allbusiness.com and Advertising Age magazine) not considered valid in the Wikipedia community?
Thanks, KTHaney (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)KtHaneyKTHaney (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
As you probably already know, we are facing some problems at MOTD. I am personally monitoring all the nominations on a daily basis and I'm finding very difficult to aprove the motto for the next day. The number of nominations has grown significantly, but even then it seems not enough. Please, if you have time, take a look at the nominations. And, if you like some of them but you think they are not good enough for being approved because of the set of links or and etcetera, please, try to improve them where it is possible. At this rate, I fear that we will see the end of the project. Thanks in advance.
I have also added a special nomination for this Sunday, 1st of May (International Workers' Day or May Day). Please, take a look at it if you can.
All the best. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 15:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
P.S.: I'm sorry to bother you again, but take a look at this if you can. Once again, thank you. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 18:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. I don't know what Advisor.js is but I see you're using it a lot and thought I ought to direct your attention to this edit that you made with it, which broke an image. It might be worth trying to exclude URLs and images from whatever changes it's making. Kind regards. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.
This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Hurricanehink (submissions) and Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 19:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Susan.schafer (talk) 14:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article JO Josh Eastman Entertainment is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JO Josh Eastman Entertainment until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ScottSteiner ✍ 08:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Sir, I want to know which type of contents is unecylopedic in nature as you have written to stop adding unencyclopedic content. I had added some information in Darbhanga and almost all of them are removen by you. I duly understand that references are of utmost necessity and I will comply my further edits with reference. I have resided in Darbhanga and believe that current article is a stub to its status. Further Darbhanga is the 2nd biggest city in Bihar and capital of ancient Mithila. Waiting for your prompt reply.
Mani Bhushan —Preceding unsigned comment added by ManiBhushan1991 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)