Leave a new message

	Archives:
	$, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
This page has archives. Sections older than 24 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Plastikspork is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries on this talk page. If you wish to obtain a more prompt response, please send an email.

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

((Admin dashboard))

22 July 2024
Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter Essay: Reflections on editing and obsession In the media: What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book? Obituary: JamesR Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword Humour: Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Nielsen Ratings

Posted copyright warning for Nielsen Media.

Is IMDB a reliable source?

1. Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 17#Is IMDb a reliable_source?
2. Wikipedia:Citing IMDb

Prefix search

• Special:PrefixIndex

Catscan

• US nuclear plants and NRC region # templates

Hello, Plastikspork. You have new messages at Template talk:Texas House of Representatives.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hello, Plastikspork. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

Hello Plastikspork, Eduemoni↑talk↓ has given you a shinning smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shinning Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

Hi! I see that you merged the Template:WW2InfoBox into the World War II article. The talk page of that template is now left here: Talk:World War II summary. What do you think about the idea to move that talk page to Talk:World War II/Infobox and to keep as a subpage for discussing the infobox? Vanjagenije (talk) 01:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. After moving it several times, hopefully this is the last time. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for lending me that message you sent me, but just to let you know, I didn't do these types of actions.

My account was hacked by someone I knew who tried to get me blocked from Wikipedia forever. My apologies for what happened, but I hope this won't happen again.

I'm tired of having my account hacked everytime. DBrown SPS 00:50, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

SHEBERGHAN 60% TURKMEN POPULATION ( so please search and edit again ) thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.96.62.69 (talk) 16:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

serius admnim
Thank you for using your tools (sporks) for the improvement of the project, for example by closing templates for discussion in a way that makes sense and shows patience and diligence to explain, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (18 August 2008, 8 January 2010)!

A year ago, you were the 429th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Plastikspork, welcome back! Hope you're doing well. If you get the time, would you be able to look at this request please? Thanks! Rehman 01:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

could you history merge Module:Solar eclipse/db/150, Module:Solar eclipse/db/155, Module:Solar eclipse/db/160, and Module:Solar eclipse/db/165 with Module:Solar eclipse/data/150, Module:Solar eclipse/data/155, Module:Solar eclipse/data/160, and Module:Solar eclipse/data/165? doesn't matter to me which way they are merged but if you use '/db' the please change it in Module:Solar eclipse to match. I plan to do the rest later (or you can if you are feeling board). thank you. Frietjes (talk) 22:50, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, I tried to migrate Module:Solar eclipse/db/200, but for some reason the auto-lua formatting doesn't appear like it does in Module:Solar eclipse/data/200. please delete Module:Solar eclipse/data/200 so it will use Module:Solar eclipse/db/200 and see if deleting my test edits from Module:Solar eclipse/db/200 will fix the auto-lua formatting. I will use the old method for merging the others. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Plastikspork. Obviously the consensus was against me. Obviously your close of the discussion as delete was proper. But, you may not delete the template before substituting its uses (after pointing all its redirects back at it), and thereby changing all my posts where I used it and its redirects, as well as posts of others when they used it. I will help with that process, if you want, or even just do it for you. Please advise.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Fuhghettaboutit, it looks like there are zero? see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Tiny_ping. Frietjes (talk) 23:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Frietjes There are about 550 uses of tping, which was a redirect to it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:17, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fuhghettaboutit, template:tping points to template:reply to. so what would be the point of changing all the template:tping (a redirect) to template:ping (another redirect)? Frietjes (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It points to it now; Plastikspork redirected it after he deleted tiny ping. My posts, using ((tping)), were me using a shortcut to ((tiny ping)). It is effectively no different than me (or anyone else) having used it directly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:25, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fuhghettaboutit, right, so what would be the point of changing all the transclusions of template:tping (a redirect) to template:ping (another redirect)? Frietjes (talk) 23:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What? No, ((tiny ping)) – what ((tping)) was a redirect to – did not have the same content as ((ping)), it had its own content (a much smaller-sized linked name). Tiny ping needs to be restored, and tping pointed back at it, so that all transcluded uses of it, when substituted, will place its content, and thus display as intended when originally placed. I'm not sure why you're bringing up ((ping)) at all. That just a redirect to reply to.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fuhghettaboutit, as far as I can tell the entire purpose of deleting template:tiny ping was because it had such small text, so replacing it with a substituted version would be a bad idea, in my opinion. a better option would be to ask for a 'tiny' option to be added to template:reply to. I'm sure Andy Mabbett, RexxS, Timothy G., and editors concerned with accessibility would be happy to help come up with a compromise. by the way, if you don't like the size of template:reply to why not open common.css and add .template-ping { font-size:50%; } ? see here for an example. you can change the 50% to anything you want. Frietjes (talk) 00:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was the purpose and going forward the template will be deleted. That's no dispensation whatever to change my posts in a few hundred places, as I intended them to display (or anyone else's). Nor does it stop me from pinging people however I want, including manually reducing it in the future. It only stops this template from future use. This should have been done without my asking. But as I said, I am even willing to do it though I shouldn't have to. Of course I could just undelete it, undo the redirect and get started and then delete it when I'm done, except that using my admin powers to undelete something after a discussion in which I was involved (even if it would be intended only for the few days to allow the substitution) is some species of wheel warring.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a WP:POINTy request and should be ignored. The community consensus was clearly that using such minuscule, unreadable, text is a beach of our policy on acesisbility. Manually recreating its effect wuld be disruptive. An admin should know better. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course you would say that Andy, in lieu of actual civil discourse. No, if this was pointy, I would have some other agenda than to simply have my posts not changed, which should have happened seamlessly without any effort on my part. No matter; I've figured out a way to do this without undeletion. I am disappointed that you, Plastik did not remedy this or see fit to even comment.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

can you fix this fork/redirect? thank you Frietjes (talk) 16:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This will call ((infobox person/height)) for any height parameter; I assume this is what you wanted. Alakzi (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's better. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i have just seen this discussion as a consequence of the template being deleted. I would have said Keep and do not agree with the deletion. I think there has been too stricter interpretation of policy here that does not meet common sense. I found this template useful and belive many other readers would as well, i found it a useful way to navigate between topics that inform about *different* characteristics of a country; the central value of the template is exactly the reason that was erroneously but well-meaningly cited for its deletion. Also, i believe the process has been floored. Only two or three editors views seem to have been taken into account which seems insufficient without making further efforts to draw others into the debate. I see no review of available facts like to number of page views, number page links, which could indicate support for counterarguements. Whizz40 (talk) 09:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry missed the discussion. I felt as though the arguments put forth by DexDor and Rob Sinden were convincing. A ((tfd)) tag was placed on the template, and the creator was notified. So, anyone reading the transcluding articles, or watching the template would have noticed. I did review the number of page links, and in fact, that was one of the reasons for deleting the template. Unless there is some procedural error that I am missing, your next step would be WP:DRV. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 10:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Plastikspork. Why did you close this discussion less than twelve hours after I posed a question? In addition, what were the opposing arguments that convinced you to close it as a "no consensus"? Alakzi (talk) 11:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus was coming out of the discussion, mostly due to the events immediately preceding the nomination of the template. There also wasn't a clear consensus concerning the choice of replacement. I would suggest waiting a bit, renominating it, without pre-orphaning it, and you will most likely get a more conclusive result. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 11:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Plastikspork/away