This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mr.Z-man. 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.
You reverted me in the middle of doing vandal reversions and as far as I can tell, you've never edited the article before, so its unlikely it popped up on your watchlist. I assume you were patrolling RC, saw my big edit, thought it might be controversial or something, and reverted it I BOLDly edited the article, and you reverted it telling me to take it to the talk page (even though the last edit to the talk page was a month ago), because it was a big edit (since when is that reason for a reversion?), not necessarily because you disagreed with the edit. At least you gave the vandals the courtesy of a talk page notification. Mr.Z-man23:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
You know as well as I do that removing huge amounts of an article can be a reason for reversion, and even a reason for a warning. As it says in the uw-delete template: "discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page". The amount of discussion (or lack of discussion) on that particular Talk page is irrelevant, and so is the question if this particular page is on my watchlist or not. The info you removed had been in the article for over a year, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if the general consensus is leave it in. Personally I didn't consider it to be a mindless list of pointless vandalism either. Finally, you would have preferred me to slap a uw-delete template on this page? Weird. Channel ® 23:34, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Last I checked, the user warning templates aren't policy. WP:BOLD is at least a guideline. I certainly won't revert a user just because they removed a large amount of content, that's why I was somewhat surprised when it happened. If I disagreed with the removal or it appeared to be vandalism I'd revert it. But reverting simply because something may be controversial is directly contrary to the reason Wikipedia has been so successful: Bold editing and no arbitrary rules. And no, I wouldn't have appreciated a uw-delete, its called a friendly message. Also, I didn't say it was vandalism (though it was pretty pointless). It was unsourced, unencyclopedic, and barely relevant, and an "in popular culture" section (or in this case about 5 sections) shouldn't be more than half of the article's content, unless this is what we really want. Mr.Z-man23:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure why it removed it, it seems to have removed it from a lot of pages it shouldn't have. Maybe a temporary API glitch? Mr.Z-man00:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Dear Mr.Z-man...Since you agreed that the sock puppet process needed an overhaul, I was wondering if you would be somewhat active in making sure that it gets done. Currently, the merging of Suspected sock puppets and Requests for checkuser is going rather slow. I would like to get the templating done soon. To do that the merging needs to be completed first, or at least the proposed process finalized. I ask you to take part in getting this done. You can start by reading SSP2 and then the talk page. I have already written two of the templates, but the rest will take a finalized process to write. Hopefully, you have the time to take part in this. Have a nice day! - LA @ 05:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Fixed, was bugzilla:14933, but when it saved it, it parsed what I actually submitted, so the version that I had in my browser cache was different than what was saved on the server. Mr.Z-man13:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Aviation stats
I noticed you posted the stats I asked for (I've been stalking, waiting for it). Do you need to work on it more or can I work with it/edit it? Do you want it kept in your userspace or can I move it to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Aviation/Popular pages? Can this be set up to update in the future, say once a month? Thanks for your help! - TrevorMacInnis (Contribs) 01:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I've moved it out of userspace. I'll try to remember to update it whenever the full stats for July are put onto Henrik's site. If I don't do it, leave me a note. Also, if you want the full set of data for something (all 30,000+ pages in the category), just send me an email with what format you want (MS Excel, MS WordCSV, LaTeX, ODS/ODT, PDF, SQL, XML, or YAML) and I'll reply with the raw data attached. Mr.Z-man01:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
That's great, thanks a lot. Is doing this much work for you? Also, I've decided to add a column of assessment stats to the page, as you can see. Is there something that can be worked up to get this as well when the (bot?) runs? - TrevorMacInnis (Contribs)
Now that the script is written it won't be much work at all. If I can figure out why it didn't work with articles that had double quotes in the title (I had to look up and enter those manually), I should be able to set it up to run fully automated. An assessment column shouldn't be too hard to add. Mr.Z-man22:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I followed up your protection with a question at RPP and haven't got a response yet - probably because it's in the fulfilled/denied section. Nfitz (talk) 16:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
FYI, the editors came to a quick consensus on the talk page, so I dropped it to semi-protection per Nfitz's request at WP:RPP. Let me know if you have any concerns with this. Cheers, caknuck°is back from his wikisiesta04:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mr.Z! I just noticed that his page is full protected. Do you think it might be better to have it semi protected or not protected at all? [1] --mboverload@15:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could block user 69.77.143.110 either for a week, 24 hours, or permanently. He keeps making inappropriate edits to Wikipedia and has been blocked once for doing the same thing and seems to keep doing inappropriate edits. One of the pages that he has done the most inappropriate edits is to the Kazoo page. Please talk this over with the other admins about blocking user 69.77.143.110. Thank you. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 20:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
The other solutions are to leave it alone and hope it resolves itself, or block all the people revert warring. Page protection seemed to make the most sense. Mr.Z-man01:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Move page
Hi Mr.Z-man, I'm having problem moving/reverting a page back to its original location. I once moved Magnus Svensson (floorball) to Magnus Svensson (Floorball), but now I am having difficulty moving it back. I check the log and everything, press the revert link, and when I finally try to move it, I keep getting "Error: could not submit form". Would it be possible for you to move it, as I am obviously having problems with that. Zadora13 (talk) 18:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Fixed, the problem was that the correct title had a few edits from people fixing redirects, so it had to be deleted first. Mr.Z-man18:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Request for unprotect
Hi. You protected the template Northern Ireland tasks. This template should not be protected as it is constantly changing (albeit not very often, currently) as a guide to what articles need consideration for adding to the 'pedia. Could you unprotect this when you can? Cheers.
Well, ok, but I was under the impression that the "bad image" list was to be used to prevent persistent vandalism primarily using sexual imagery, not the one time (mis)use of a totally innocuous line drawing. Exploding Boy (talk) 19:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
You only provided one diff, so how was I to know that. But still, surely the appropriate action is to block that vandal, not to prevent everyone from using that image. Exploding Boy (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
In fact, it appears he already has been blocked, and the vandalism you reference happened yesterday. Has there been further activity indicating that adding the image to the bad image list is necessary? Exploding Boy (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The vandal uses a different IP every time. If someone has a legitimate use for the image they can ask for an exemption. The WP:Help desk gets fairly frequent complaints about this (searching for "Zodiac" brings up 2 yesterday). There's at least one thread currently on both AN and ANI. (I found the image from the diff on the AN thread, apparently a different template was vandalized today). A search for tickets that contain "Zodiac" in the OTRS vandalism queue found about 50 complaints there in the last month. As for further activity, did you read my last comment at all? Mr.Z-man19:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I did read your comment; did you read my response? This seems to be a unique situation. It's not an image of a penis that is being widely used to vandalise a variety of pages by a number of editors. It's simply that one particular vandal seems to favour this image as a kind of signature. Placing the image on the bad image list won't prevent the vandal from continuing to vandalise pages, but it will make it harder for others to use the image (particularly those who aren't familiar with the list and don't know how to ask for an exception). And there's nothing stopping him from simply choosing a different image to use -- there are several images of celtic crosses to choose from. Are we to block every single image? Exploding Boy (talk) 19:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Thanks for taking on the bot request for geolocating articles about places in the Arctic. We now have Template:WikiProject Arctic. Would you also be able to tag the pages? Do please provide a list for checking first, but I thought I'd ask about the tagging. Would also be good if you could add assessments (marked as bot-added assessments) when an assessment for another project already exists. Or should I ask someone else for that? Carcharoth (talk) 04:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
You'll probably want to ask someone else for the tagging. There's plenty of bots already approved to do tagging. I can provide a list that can be loaded directly into AWB (which I believe is what most people use for project tagging). I started running the script about 13 hours ago, its now about 35% done. So far its found 1,051 pages that appear to have a latitude north of the arctic circle. I'll post some more details about how it works to the talk page of wherever I'm going to post the list a little later. Mr.Z-man17:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the list. Will be very useful! BTW, there were a few entires where the co-ords were wrong in the article, and one case of not being on the Earth at all! See here. :-) Carcharoth (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that. I detailed a few possible sources of error on the talk page and removed one really obvious one that was right on top before I pasted the list. It had about a 99% success rate at finding the coordinates and there were some cases where the data was bad (usually due to a lat/long mixup where the longitude is >90) or it had trouble with odd Unicode in the title. I'll look through some of the misses to see if there are any more that should be in the list. Also, as the list was generated using the most recent database dump, any article newer than (or that had coordinates added to) about July 26 won't be in the list. Mr.Z-man00:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Category based Bot Tagging
Hi there, I hope you remember expressing serious concerns regarding category based WikiProject tagging by bots here. I made this FAQ list which tries to answer some of your concerns. Let me know if you have any questions . Thanks -- TinuCherian - 11:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you from Horologium
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed unanimously with the support of 100 editors. Your kindness is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Wizardman, Black Falcon and jc37 for nominating me. — Horologium
Article history
You once protected Template:ArticleHistory, and someone came along a month later and unprotected it. The template uses complex and intricate syntax and is used across thousands of talk pages; several editors have fiddled it into a state of brokenness lately, without discussing their requests or needed changes on talk. Very taxing during a time that Gimmetrow is on vacation, and I lost a lot of time today trying to track down the origin of talk page errors. Would you consider re-protecting it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
The IP address will probably be reassigned to someone else in a day or so. "Real Grawp" vandalism is pagemoves, stuff like this is just imitators anyway. Mr.Z-man22:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey. This won't be the first time I'll request this because it has happened before, but could you please semi-protect the template as opposed to full protection? I'm its maintainer and now unable to work on it when necessary.
Since you protected the page, I would like to ask you if you could change the color back to #FFCC00. It is now #FFFF33, but has been changed without any discussion and the former color has been around uncontested for over a year. This is a problem because some pages that do not use the template use #FFCC00 as the color for the party and this would create some inconsistencies. – Zntrip18:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Mr.Z-man. Since User:Husond gave me this response, so I was wondering what folks like you would think about where it should redirect. I personally think it should go to WP:NPOV, but I'm not sure. Cheers, ~ Troy (talk) 00:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure, NPOV or DR would both be good, or you could write an essay explaining what a content dispute is. Mr.Z-man01:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
My sincere apologies for the problem caused by my use of WikiCleaner. I was using it to pinpoint pages in need of corrective action and was indeed viewing and fixing each individually. I wasnt aware of glitches or problems with the 'tool' and had no idea that it was automatically making so many inaccurate changes, entirely independent of myself. The realization of this dilemma is frustrating because I honestly contributed a significant number of accurate, productive edits.
Thanks--1oddbins1 (talk) 22:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
bad image
Your addition to MediaWiki:Bad image list has attracted more comments than usual. Could you clarify on the talk page there whether you foresee this to be a permanent addition or intend to remove it after the relevant situation has been resolved? Thanks, BanyanTree22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Oregon
Hi could you change the protection level for {{WikiProject Oregon}} to semi-protected? There are several of us who aren't admins who help maintain the template, we keep a close eye on it, and we haven't had any vandalism problems. Thanks! Katr67 (talk) 05:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you fully protected {{Articleissues}} a month or so ago due to vandalism, and it being high-risk. I was wondering if you would consider reducing the level to semi-protected. The template has never, to my knowledge, been a frequent target for vandalism, nor for edit-warring. Prior to protection, I'd been actively helping maintain the template, but as a non-admin I can only sit back and post {{editprotected}} tags on the talkpage to change something. Let me know. Thanks!Aervanathlivesinthe Orphanage15:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
RFAR alert
One of the arbitrators has asked that every admin who is arguably involved in the events at Sarah Palin be notified of an arbitration case covering it. I therefore draw your attention to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#MZMcBride. In your case, you are, like me, one of those who made an edit to the article while it was full protected. GRBerry18:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to express my concern that with the closure of Windows Live Help Community, you have deleted the entire history of the article and simply redirected it to Windows Live. There are particular important information on there that should be migrated to the Windows Live article if this action was taken, and you have failed to allow this to happen. --Pikablu0530 (talk) 03:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
So, as we usually do in such circumstances, I decided to protect the pages he had been editing disruptively, rather than leave some other admin the headache of possibly having to rangeblock. There were three, of which Semih Aydilek was one. The possible deletion of the article was not an issue to me; the PROD tagger is supposed to start the AFD if the tag is removed, instead of just reverting it back. In addition, I do not believe from his edits above that he would have participated in an AfD. Therefore, the protections were an overall response to his disruptive editing and threats, not an attempt to gain an advantage in a content dispute in which I was not a participant at the time. Daniel Case (talk) 19:57, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Having a subpage was not a way to get around the length restriction, as the page was within the guidelines (it was just to make it easier to see and update). And, I wasn't aware that there were seven line breaks; it had never happened before.
It was a damned-silly point, I agree, but since when did being silly or misguided become a reason for deleting user points on a discussion page? Robert A.West (Talk) 04:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Because it was basically trolling from the get-go, that escalated into off-topic trolling, that escalated into random-tinfoil-hat-ranting? Mr.Z-man04:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
OK...I spent nearly two years in relative inactivity, so perhaps I missed the change to where we now delete the tinfoil-hat-ranting from talk pages. That may be an improvement, provided it doesn't go too far, but it may just feed the paranoia of some editors who feel they are being censored. In this case, as I said, the section was no great loss. Happy editing! Robert A.West (Talk) 04:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Relisting AfD discussions
Hello, you have created a bit of a mess. I realize your intentions were good, but when you relist discussions, it is necessary to comment-out the transclusion in the original AfD log. Instead, you placed invisible text after the transclusion, and left it transcluded. This causes mathbot to still see it as open, and to list it on a few maintenance pages of AfD's that are overdue for closing. I'm cleaning it all up, and ask that you please do it the correct way in the future. Thanks, Jerrydelusional ¤ kangaroo14:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
PS: if this is the result of a defective user script that may have been distributed to others, please attempt to help contain the infection. I realize that other people use your scripts, and I see several users making the exact same error today. This mess can quickly get out of hand. Jerrydelusional ¤ kangaroo14:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I found the problem: In User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js, the line that contains "\n{"+"{"+closeAFD_PageName+"}}<!--Relisted-->\n");" Should include the wikimarkup to comment out the actual transclusion. In other words, it needs a "<!--" before the first brace, and this should not be present before the word "relisted". Please fix asap. Thanks, Jerrydelusional ¤ kangaroo14:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Err, no, that's what it adds to today's log. For the old log:
Just passing by, I'd like to point out that that code is broken: if you start with the string "foo.bar", it will first (correctly) turn it into "foo\.bar" and then (on the fifth line) into "foo\\.bar", which will match "foo"–backslash–any_character–"bar". If you're going to do it like this, you should make sure you escape backslashes before any other character. Also note that there are, in fact, a bunch of other characters that (can) have special meaning in a regexp, including both square and curly brackets. In any case, I'd replace all that code with:
Thanks for that, not sure how I didn't notice that. Though the reason I don't bother to escape brackets and curly braces is because they aren't valid characters in titles. Mr.Z-man15:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Mr.Z-Man, I'm a sysop from ml wiki. The same set of fellows who started the article here started the article in ml wiki. Please note that we have deleted this article on notability reasons from Ml wiki. Please see discussions in ml:സംവാദം:തോമസ്_കുഴിനാപ്പുറത്ത് (if you understand malayalam). He appears to be one of many 'self proclaimed notable' personalities. Same set of IPs and logins came with lame reasoning and we suspect that it was socks or people partial to the pastor in question. despite all the stir caused by them, ml wiki users unanimously opined to delete the same. I thought you should know, as you made a call on this article before. Thanks, --Jyothis (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, quick question. Love your new script but I'm occasionally getting the following error:
Edit failed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 September 9
It edits the AfD to add the re-list template but does not edit the log. Is there something I'm missing? Thanks TravellingCari04:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
No idea, edits could fail for a variety of reasons, though it shouldn't fail consistently like that. I fixed something earlier that could be related, and added some more error reporting stuff. Try bypassing your cache of the script and seeing if it still happens. If it reports more information with the error, copy that here. Mr.Z-man04:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Think it might be fixed, or at least it worked when I last tried with no error. Wonder, could an edit conflict cause it? I'll keep you in the loop if I get more messages. TravellingCari04:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I regularly use this great gadget, so first off thank you very much for this invaluable tool. Recently, I formatted some refs in here using it, only to discover an AWB cite template fix following it. Maybe the refToolbar needs to be updated a bit? user:Everyme06:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi Mr.Z-man
I found out about your ref-toolbar and its exactly what I was looking for. It works perfectly. Thanks for creating it. --Superflewis (talk) 11:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I know several people have been having a problem with a relist user script lately, so perhaps this is the case with you? I completed the relist process for you on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norman_Drew_(cartoonist), (the commenting out on the old log). If it was just an oversight or internet connection problem or whatever, then no problem, but if it is a user script problem, please have it looked at by the script developer. Thanks, Jerrydelusional ¤ kangaroo03:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know where you are based, but these are well-known & important national institutions in Great Britain.
Davy King is easily as 'notable' & significant as many other people who are listed in Wikipedia. So why waste time & energy vandalising this resource? I urge you to undelete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Curiousexplorer (talk • contribs) 10:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
I am questioning the deletion of the geneablog entry. One of the reasons for deletion provided was that professional genealogist don't use the term - and Megan Smolenyak Smolenyak was provided as an example. However, she is a member of the Geneabloggers Facebook Group. There are over 180 members of that Facebook group, several of whom are professionals. Also including Dick EastmanKimberly Powell and Sally Jacobs [Links are to their blogs] So, it seems erroneous to suggest the term isn't in use by professionals when several well respected professionals are members of a group that uses the term as part of its name.
Thanks. I was unaware of the decision until after it was made. I had read the Deletion Review instructions and it had stated, "Before listing a review request, please attempt to discuss the matter with the admin who deleted the page (or otherwise made the decision) as this could resolve the matter faster." So that is what I did. I shall proceed to the next step. Gavroche42 (talk) 17:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
perfect response appreciation society
Re: revert of post on vilage pump : diff 'that's nice' ROFL, how much effort - if only they'd use it constructively... and nicely deflected! next dan for you :) LeeVJ (talk) 01:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey there, Z-man. Your script is probably the best thing since they invented the Wiki (as I said on IRC, "this thing's the shit") but when closing something as "merge" it doesn't seem to add the rationale for the closure: [7]. I had this nice long thing typed in the box, and it didn't get posted. Is this just me, or is it a bug in the script? Thanks! Hersfold(t/a/c)02:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
No idea, it should work fine in FF3, perhaps a conflict with another script? What does the error console (Tools->Error console) say? Mr.Z-man15:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Working now, can't begin to explain why. I cleaned up the delsort which wasn't working and re-installed that in my monobook and all of a sudden yours started to work. Can't explain why it stopped or not, but I'm happy it's working. Thanks for your help with the great tool. TravellingCari02:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
gone again. I gutted monobook, cleared the cache. Added back only thoe I used and knew what they were -- twinkle, friendly, delsort, yours and the easy block. Lost your tabs again. Have cleared cache multiple times. This is FF3 on the Macbook Pro TravellingCari03:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I'm having the same problem — it stops after putting the closure templates on the AFD page and fails to actually go and delete the article and its talk page. Script error is reporting "deleteredirects is not defined". Stifle (talk) 08:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Issue again. Relist is working fine, as is keep but on delete it's hanging after it gets the token and saves the page, but then it doesn't actually delete. This is FF 2 TravellingCari18:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I could not make an apology, mainly because I was sleeping, and I don't know about you, but I can't apologize in my sleep. I was making these reverts at 9:30-10:00 PM my time (I believe), the time I usually go to bed.
So I had a disadvantage, based on I usually get up late, having no computer time before school, so I had to wait until after 5 PM my time just so I could make an apology. I had absolutely no awareness of this during my day. I have apologized, and am now distancing myself from Wikipedia. Sorry, Jnt • c02:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Wow, this is going to sound cheeky. I see you created some pretty good "Spotlight City" subpages for Portal:Michigan about a year and a half ago. I'm trying to bring the portal to featured portal status, and some of those articles would do nicely for the selected article sub-section, so I was wondering if you'd mind if they were removed so they could be included in a fresh rotation of articles I'm going to create? They're excellent work, but I didn't want to push in, so to speak. Qst (talk) 19:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Some oddities this morning - the first two articles I closed as Delete, the script didn't delete the talk page, coming up with an error, and then on the next one, it didn't delete the article itself. Then I merged one, and it didn't perform the redirect (the next one worked!). I'm guessing this is a db issue rather than your script? Black Kite10:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Still working on it, it will probably involve either a short delay between deletions, or automatic retrying if it fails, or both. Mr.Z-man15:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Confirmed as of now on a Mac in FF3.x and PC using FF 2.x * Deleted Werewolf Priest
I believe the problem is due to a recent change (rev:41018 I believe) in how the software handles deletions. More queries are wrapped in one transaction now, so the lock for each deletion lasts longer. This reduces the chances of deletions happening without being logged or not completing correctly, and would normally be unnoticeable, but causes problems when trying to do 2 deletion operations at exactly the same time. Hopefully I'll have some time to work on this Wednesday or Thursday. Mr.Z-man03:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
No rush, this should be fun for you. Not trying to fix everything I and the wiki break. At least this one still handles most of the steps and makes life infinitely easier. TravellingCari04:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Why have we deleted the page of one of southern Ontario's foremost indie record labels when Wikipedia's relevancy policy allows for MPPs from Yukon to have their own articles? Burnt Oak has received a slew of media coverage in Canada, their own showcase at Pop Montreal, lots of radio play, etc. Moreover, two of the label's artists - Richard Laviolette and Elbow Beach Surf Club - are apparently well-known enough to have articles written about them by different parties.
I suspect the intentions for filing Burnt Oak for deletion may have been seditious, in actuality. Can you restore the page so a good deal of information on a relevant subject isn't lost?
Im not an admin but in the general well being i never knew someone could be blocked for an infinite period of time as you added to the admin options here. How many times do you think that has been used or will be used in the future? By all means keep it but i was just wondering. On other wikis they use infinite but here? I dont think so, its always indefinite even for the worst of vandals :) Best 211.30.111.105 (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
As far as the software is concerned, "never" == "infinite" == "indefinite" and I think there might be another one or 2 synonyms I'm forgetting. I think "infinity" is what's actually stored in the database. However, the protection form requires that one of the options be "infinite" or it won't work correctly, so until the next software update in a few days when the protection form will use different options, it needs to have "infinite" somewhere. Mr.Z-man16:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Request about one of your PROD deletions from 21 November 2007
If there any chance that a function can be added that warns you if you have edits in the nominated article when you close an AFD? It might help keep this from happening again. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Could you please unprotect this template so that I can add C-class functionality to it per a current discussion on WT:CRIC and to complete work begun by another project member? BlackJack | talk page15:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
That's why they put so much effort in keeping "Grawp" away from the site, Before yesterday I didn't see why Wikipedia put so much effort into dealing with "Grawp", but after seeing the massive page-move vandalism "he" does (I am becoming convinced that "Grawp" is not a single user but an "ideology" that various vandals use), I can see why Wikipedia does so . He/they do really seem to waste a lot of users' time. Vivio TestarossaTalkWho20:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
AFD script not deleting talk pages of deleted articles?
I keep getting this message:
Deletion error on (the article talkpage). Error info:internal_api_error_DBQueryError : Database query error
I was just notified that when I closed this AfD as delete, it also took Falling Down with it. The latter is completely unrelated but I'm thinking the similar name may have resulted in the script finding it? Just a heads up, I'm not sure if I'm an odd case of it happening but thought you should know. TravellingCari21:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
A friendly reminder from the Adopt-a-User project =)
Hey there Mr.Z-man! This is a friendly reminder to update your status at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area/Adopters whenever it is appropriate in order to provide new users with the most up-to-date information on available adopters. Also please note that we will be removing adopters who have not edited in 60 days. If you become active again (and we hope you do!) please feel free to re-add yourself. Cheers!
Looking at your contribs for the past few days, it seems to be working correctly, and its working correctly for me and everyone else. Without a specific description of what the problem is, there's nothing to fix. Mr.Z-man16:47, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I've posted a question at WT:GUN as to what you think about the proposal I had put up earlier. Also, do I read your comment correctly that you agree with those who are trying to keep a simple, referenced statement that the Heckler & Koch MP5 was used in the insignia of Red Army Faction off the MP5 article? No new legislation was passed as a result of that, it wasn't even in itself a criminal use, and yet people cited me WP:GUN#Criminal use. So that's not censorship then, people openly stating that they want to "keep the article free from politics and other trivial popculture issues"? That's NPOV? Really? Everyme18:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Wait, you want to change the guidelines to suit one particular instance? That's an even worse idea than I previously thought. Like trying to ban seat belts because in certain types of car accidents they can cause more injury. Especially since its not actually criminal use, that part of the guideline wouldn't seem to apply. I'm not sure who you are quoting, I see one editor mentioned that in a comment on the talk page, it looks like you are blowing this massively out of proportion. Mr.Z-man18:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
No. I ran into what I consider POV resistance on MP5 several months ago when I tried to include that statement and now again. When I was cited WP:GUN#Criminal use back then, I thought that it is incompatible with core content policy. I still do. I just simultaneously started the RfCs recently, but the two cases really have nothing to do with each other now, since the "concern" about the RAF addition "violating" the WP:GUN "guideline" is not at the center of the current article RfC. It was brought into play in an earlier discussion several months ago where User:John and me gave up unnerved by the senseless repetition of non-arguments, particularly the repeated citing of that Wikiproject page. Nevertheless, saying that that "guideline" is perfectly fine appears to imply that you also think the MP5 article should be kept clean of "[promotion of] criminal use of the MP5, [promotion of] a criminal Marxist terror organization and their actions in an article free of politics" (and other poems).
Anyway, had you actually read (which you obviously didn't) my post at AN, with a little bit of concentration and luck you might just have found that I did very well disclose the relation between both RfCs. You didn't even try. And have fun with all those racially clean gun articles. No politics or other meaningless trivia. People getting away with saying things like all pages in the influence sphere of WP:GUN are not part of Wikipedia, but a specialised encyclopedia, maintained and governed not by Wikipedia policy and Wikipedia-wide community consensus but by the rednecks who want to keep it all Aryan. Oh god. I could go on for hours like this. Anyway, fuckit and thanks for nothing. Everyme20:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Could you consider trying to debate with people without attacking them at the same time? You might attract more support; calling me a redneck, that will get me to change my opinion. You're reading far too much between the lines of what I said and putting words into my mouth. I agree the RAF should probably be mentioned in the MP5 article. I don't agree that the guideline as written violates NPOV. Many policies, if misinterpreted, violate other policies. Just because I support the current wording of the guideline as opposed to removing it or your hopelessly vague wording you think I also support everyone's interpretation of the guideline in every situation? I certainly hope I never said anything to that effect. Cut out the rhetoric. You wanted my opinion, you got it. Mr.Z-man21:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Calling you a redneck? That wasn't my intention and I'm sorry if it came across as if I did. I was talking about someone else, at that article, the same someone I quoted verbatim above. I'm just angry, because he's an idiot and assumes ownership of that article and I don't like the fact that some of the more well-spoken folks I met there are associating themselves with such an ugly little soul (disclaimer: that's just my own private opinion, and I'm actually being as kind about this as I can). Generally speaking, "redneck" in my usage is a generic term referring to clueless content fascists (both methodically and politically) who are categorically unwilling to reconsider their own position even in the face of hard facts and impenetrable reasoning and who have no real interest in building and maintaining an encyclopedia according to the spirit of our core policies. Unlike myself, I maintain. I am frequently wrong and have no major difficulties admitting it and apologising wherever applicable; although admittedly not too quickly, which may have to do with some cynicism acquired while learning the ropes in fighting for the last word. There are those who will interpret it as "weakness" instead of strength when someone is capable of reconsidering their position, and I have to vet the other person a little before I feel comfortable conceding the point without having to fear a reaction that might bait me into getting really really angry.
Moreover, I am not trying to change your opinion, or anyone else's, for that matter. Arguments, strictly logical reasoning and, yes, a compelling presentation (for a lack of patience clearly not my strongest point) are what should exclusively matter on Wikipedia. Opinions are for the privately owned mass media. I was simply taken aback by the impression that you apparently didn't read up before commenting.
As to WP:GUN#Guidelines, it's not only NPOV that is being violated there, but a perversion of what a guideline is all about. It creates new facts instead of reformulating policy as tailored to a specific set of circumstances. The vagueness of my proposed rewording (which was obviously only a rough draft) was intentional: I'd like to see those guidelines, well, be guidelines. Currently, these are faux policy since they introduce entirely arbitrary inclusion thresholds not derived from policy, nor common-sense or any valid argumentation (at least none that I've seen or been pointed to). The crux with guidelines is this exact point: They are not enforceable. You see, I would love to have included some much more prescriptive language in my rewrite of WP:WAF back last year. But the point was moot, because there are too many too different people active there and a strict wording in that guideline wouldn't survive long, and rightly so. It's a guideline. I can't just go along and create my own enforceable facts as I see fit. And noone really can. That's why they have to be "vaguely" worded, i.e. simply recount policies and their spirit in a slightly more situation-specific way. Everything more specific has to be evaluated on a case by case basis, and guidelines should be carefully worded to describe only. Just creating a fact like those criminal use thresholds (and they are apparently actually trying to enforce it in places) should be totally out of the question. What's the rationale for that exact threshold? People are telling me to outline just why and how it isn't acceptable. But that's not how it works. Guidelines may be called guidelines if and only if they strictly and entirely derive and comply with policy, which those "guidelines" do not. Look, I'm not a native speaker, and an impatient ass on top of that, which makes for a horrible handicap when it comes to convincing people of my reasoning. But I honestly believe that I do have some very valid points there. And I have yet to see so much as an attempt at anything like a reasoning on the other side of this dispute.
As to MP5/RAF: As I said there, I don't understand why people are even contesting this. At the very least I'm having a seriously hard time thinking of any non-derogatory characterisations as to why anyone would object such a statement, concise and referenced and clearly contributing to increase the article's currently laughably single-minded scope, depth and completeness.
Also, while this is already TL;DR: About that guy I told how to spell (condescending and all). Did you read his comments? Everyme23:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Protonk RfA
Hiya Mr.Z-man, could you elaborate on your oppose here? I'm not sure what you mean, and neither is the candidate. Thanks, Avruch T 20:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Not that I really care that much, but what was the point of that? Krimpet's an admin, s/he could just unprotect it when s/he felt like it. Just wondering... « Gonzo fan2007(talk) @ 04:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I guess I just didn't understand why it was indef protected after a few minutes of vandalism, especially since its a talk page. By the same token, Krimpet is capable of deciding whether or not it should be protected at all. Mr.Z-man05:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't think the images are coming back. They're corrupted and gone. People either need to re-upload or delete them. The non-free ones aren't much of a loss anyway. -Nard18:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Deleting the page doesn't help anything, all it does is make it more difficult if someone finds a copy (some have been restored through archive.org). Its possible that Wikimedia still has some on another server and the sysadmins haven't gotten around to doing anything yet. User:Gmaxwell might have some, though I don't know if he has enwiki images or only commons. Either way, I'd suggest that someone email the wikitech-llists.wikimedia.org list before we start deleting these. Mr.Z-man22:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Its a lot more complicated than that. It depends on several factors, including how much they satisfy WP:BIO (is it really obvious or skirting the edge?) and why they want it deleted (potential for some sort of harm vs. just not liking it). Mr.Z-man19:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi. We have a large back log of French commune articles to add the infoboxes from French wikipedia Status check. All that needs doing is copying the infobox directly from the French wikipedia equivalent. Please see Vulaines. All that needs doing for each article is cutting and pasting the infobox from French wiki into every article which must be bot compatible. So for Vulaines all it requires is pasting the infobox into it from here and pasting it into the english wiki article. COuld somebody please programme a bot or use some form of coding to help complete the task in hours rather than months? Blofeld of SPECTRE (talk) 11:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello Mr Z-man, you would know from a while back whenever a rollback is done of an edit, instead of the long standing page of "Reverted edits by XXX", the page now shows the diff of the rollback. You have been incredibly active at the Village Pump technical so i was wondering is it possible for this page to go back to normal, can some sort of script be made? I dont know why they did this, it is incredibly frustrating that people are changing these sort of things. Some people dont like change. Was there ever any discussion about this? Thanks, advice appreciated Monster Under Your Bed(talk)08:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Here, based on the delete reason that I see in the deletion log, it looks like you created this page. Is that really the case? Otherwise, who created it? -- IRP☎20:31, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
It was created automatically when reverting pagemove vandalism which is why I also deleted it. Why are you looking through deletion logs from April? Mr.Z-man21:19, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Mr. Z-man, I remade my userpage and it is an exact copy of the one you deleted. Go ahead and keep on deleting my userpage but it will not work because I've got a secret weapon with me. Patches1998 (talk) 22:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I like to clean things. Would you consent for me to clean your talkpage of annoying spaces? That 'secret weapon' one looks rather odd, do you tend to get a lot of oddballs lately? Tyciol (talk) 06:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
As long as its not blatant vandalism or something offensive, I generally leave it. The archive bot will pick it up in a few days. Mr.Z-man06:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
You recently closed an AFD on this article as "keep" and I was wondering if you could take a look at my reasoning here and see if a DRV is justified. I feel that the arguments made for keeping the article didn't take into consideration certain facts about the duplicated content and a fresh set of eyes reviewing the content would result in a more informed decision. Thanks, Axem Titanium (talk) 06:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
If you want to take it to DRV, that's fine, but I do not believe there was consensus to delete it. If I thought it was even close, I would have closed it as "no consensus." Several people disagreed that the duplication was a problem. Mr.Z-man16:56, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I'm actually the subject of the article. Thanks for protecting it but would it be possible to revert to the actual correct version, the one that doesn't state that I'm a drunken adulterer and list three or four books I never wrote (or thought about writing, for that matter), etc.? Much obliged...
CS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trc1 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted this temporary user page. I had never heard of the term before so I followed the link you left. When a page is left over for a blocked user to contest their block, I am sort of curious about how long they are given to do so? Tyciol (talk) 01:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The pages are generally deleted after a month or more with no edits (in this case it was about a month and a half). Note that just because the page is deleted does not mean that they cannot recreate it to contest the block. (Though given the block reason/blocking user, the proper appeal method for that particular block is to email arbcom). Mr.Z-man04:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering what page the bot will be editing? That way I can put it on my watchlist and let the project know when the bot runs. Thanks for your time. §hep • ¡Talk to me!00:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Done Mr.Z-man 12:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I was making these reverts at 9:30-10:00 PM my time (I believe), the time I usually go to bed.
lists.wikimedia.org list before we start deleting these. Mr.Z-man 22:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
