Jump to content

User talk:Proofreader77/Archive 02

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(note to self) ~3,000

~3,000 total edits (~2000 article namespace)

  • 1,000 w software assist + 2,000 manual
  • 1 notification of error prior to rollback (a criminal JFK)
  • 4 notifications of error after rollback
    • 2 caught/undone immediately by me before notification
    • 2 missed by me (see: "Prestonpans," and "Please be careful when reverting")

Namespace Edits %
Article 2032 67.13%
Talk 194 6.41%
User 45 1.49%
User talk 618 20.42%
Wikipedia 126 4.16%
Wikipedia talk 1 0.03%
Image 3 0.1%
Template 2 0.07%
Template talk 1 0.03%
Help 1 0.03%
Category 2 0.07%
Portal 2 0.07%

to do

  • Do/resolve/pass unresolved issues above ...
    • OR: Summarize here  Done
  • Then: Archive this talk page :)  Done

tomorrow

Obama becomes president.  Done :) Proofreader77 (talk) 07:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

summary of unresolved problems/issues/users

USERS

  • User CHJL (new account running up edit count, e.g., unlinking random reds, adding welcomes, creating title synonym redirects)
  • User Ummairsaeed (was deleting Islam photos, etc, NOW "playing like" vandal fighter, badly)
  • User 64.9.234.14 edits re Charlie Weis e.g., [1]
  • User 99.244.189.70 (replacing "Taiwanese" with "Chinese")
  • User Mojodaddy (doing a category reorg, apparently without discussion)
  • REMINDER (the game of vandalism) User 81.102.233.188 who knows how to play the game of vandalism (erasing their warnings immediately, editing notices on admin board).
FOLLOW-UP: User is blocked for a week ... but was given a very long reasonable lecture about what they'd done wrong, and etc etc. All these words for such an experienced trouble-maker? Hmmm
  • User 76.116.148.99, who is primarily updating many Republican politician pages ... but some Democratic (Check for POV)
  • 128.230.163.132 (review) [2] (Why remove, e.g., information table (a state's federal representative delegation) template here?)

DISAMBIGUATION

  • merge of Hasan/Hassan without proposing/discussion by User Yadamavu
  • Afghan (edit war/controversy)
  • Two-letter disambiguation pages, and the listing of people whose initials match those letters.
    • BO, B.O. B & O ... note: Barack Obama (attack bumper stickers, etc)
  • Three-letter disambibution pages (...)
    • JFK (disambiguation) -- un-notable initials on the page
    • BHO -- The issue of Barrack Hussein Obama (and inclusion of his initials)
  • Red Snow (I added a disambiguation page, and moved others to there)
  • Buzi (Hebrew biblical character stub was becoming slang dictionary) Created disambig.

CONTROVERSIAL PAGES/ISSUES

MAJOR CHANGES TO PAGES (without discussion)

POLICY ISSUES

  • BL(V) (BLP for "villains") e.g., Feiz Mohammad -- what is a fair article when "notability" is for negative things. Ponder. (NOTE: Someone has changed it from BL(V) to BLP)

DICTIONARY TYPE ARTICLES (e.g.)

  • bogger TO-DO: Wikify new references.
  • boggle
  • Note the debate about removing page of slang terms for Police

MISC

  • Osama bin Laden re "masterminding"
  • Roland Burris (that monument and the Biography)
  • Superpower designation and Brazil
  • jpg vs PNG file format (what is Wiki policy re which?
  • Washboarding (referencing of self-published page ... pet pages etc)
  • Vicki Byrne (fan wants page for fictional character from novel vs redirect)

OTHER BLP (moving on)

REVISIT/REVIEW

Proofreader77 (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

reminder: FAC reviewing

FROM DEC 2008: Hi, with a name like yours, you'd be welcome as a reviewer of Criterion 1a, among other aspects of the candidates. Tony (talk) 02:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Proofreader77 (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

front burner

  1. bogger -- wikify sources, ponder un-cited assersions (and POLICY re dictionary-type entries, including Urban_Dictionary-like "opinion pieces") Proofreader77 (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  1. Initials and disambiguation pages, BO,B.O., JFK (disambiguation), BHO

Proofreader77 (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)



B.O. disambiguation (note: re-merge to Bo) (done/monitor)

Classification: Disambiguation SEO Vandalism

This is what this was a case of. Proofreader77 (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Sub-class: Childish Political Skullduggery (CPS)

E.G., (SCENARIO) "Obama stinks! Don't believe me? Google B.O. -- See, it says right there in Google: 'B.O. refers to Body Odor * Breath Odor * Barack Obama.' Wikipedia says so!!!" (noted for file:) Proofreader77 (talk) 19:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 4 24 January 2009 About the Signpost
Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices 
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet 
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

(RC) Misc edits to review

FOLLOW-UP: Surprisingly hard to figure out what to do here ... until you notice the topic is "Plot summary" [3] ) Proofreader77 (talk) 19:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  •  Done Gravity Grave Check formatting changes. (someone else cleaned up)
  •  DoneKesuke Miyagi (revert war)
    • FOLLOW-UP: [4] admin erased things for possible BLP violation ... but it was not of the fictional article subject, but someone referenced in the junk paragraphs.
    • REMINDER: Of how close we can come to leaping to premature humor. :)

Proofreader77 (talk) 03:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC))

Template games?

Proofreader77 (talk) 05:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Tajik vs Afghan ...

Proofreader77 (talk) 05:52, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Humboldt State University

Hi Proofreader77,

Thank you for undoing your revert to the recent additions to Humboldt State University. I was worried about your revert because of Wikipedia:Assume good faith, but it looks like you got there first :) Much appreciated.

Was there something in particular about the edits that you found unfitting? -Clueless (talk) 19:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The reason for the initial revert was that the edit that appeared on my screen was the last one adding the red-linked professor (which appeared at first glance a made-up name) ... But after reverting I saw you added far more than that red link. And it all looked good. Hence my revert. :) Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Nice, thanks :) I didn't make those changes; somebody from an anonymous IP did. I just happen to go to the school and the article's on my watchlist. Cheers! -Clueless (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Casino Royale (novel) (note: trivia game cheating)

How do you like that person? They are purposely vandalizing Wikipedia entries when the answer to a Great Midwest Trivia Contest is found on Wikipedia, then reverting after the question is done. I'm working on a WP:AIV report because they are using multiple IPs. I don't know how to deal with rotating IPs/range blocks. Royalbroil 20:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, an interesting case! lol No, I have no idea either (re rotating range blocks). I'll add this to my "vandalism cases to study" file. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 20:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I didn't know you studied vandalism. I was thanking you for cleaning up Casino Royale, but that didn't come out as I'm too tired to think very straight after 40 hours of trivia (with limited sleep). Royalbroil 20:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
All new recent-changes patrollers "study vandalism" ... whether they want to or not. lol And I didn't know anything about the Great Midwest Trivia Contest ... until now. Cool. And, good lord, yeah I bet you're tired. Coffee!!! Proofreader77 (talk) 21:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Believe it or not - adrenaline is my only "drug". Royalbroil 21:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. vandalization of dates (and software solutions)

(this subsection is a copy from Royalbroil's talk page)

Do you know if the Wikipedia developers have done any work or thought about (or dismissed the idea) of confirmed data (e.g., dates)?

E.G., some kind of template etc. for certain kinds of information -- especially dates -- that (would almost) never change -- information that could be verified and "locked" in a database -- and could be click-verified in the article by readers.

BECAUSE: As a recent-changes patroller, I see it wastes a lot of time re-verifying dates (especially in a world in which many sources copy Wikipedia's version of the date).

P.P.S. If I could have a cup of adrenaline instead of coffee, I'd chose that. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard of this idea before. It sounds interesting. I think you should propose it, but I don't know where. Royalbroil 23:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I'll make that a back-burner project ... which if it ever comes to fruition ... will come to be known as the Wikipedia technological advance .. inspired by the Great Midwest Trivia Contest cheating scandal of '09. Cheers! Proofreader77 (talk) 01:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
"Scandal" .. he he! Royalbroil 02:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
It seems I've been infected by the "eloquence" of cable news. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 03:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

(COI) WTC Twin Towers 2 (rewrite introduction / prune POV/COI)

NOTES:

  • COI. Editor claiming he works on the project (inside information) on an ip editor talk page. [5]
  • COI. Same user, same page, but as ip (but indicates who he is) [6]
  • COI. See comments above. Same person as above using ip. [[7]]
  • (linking note) [8] by creator of related "Controvery" page.

Proofreader77 (talk) 20:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

(COI) Controversy surrounding the rebuilding of the World Trade Center

Also see the piped link to Plans to rebuild ... in Larry Silverstein article. Proofreader77 (talk) 00:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


(BOT) Pyramid (disambiguation) -- Bot removing Chinese interwiki link (done / bot Chinese puzzle remains)

NOTE: Why did this "bot" remove this link to the Chinese pyramid disambiguation page? [9] Proofreader77 (talk) 20:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done :Left note on bot's talk page, and reverted it. ZH interwiki link was correct (according to Google translate). Proofreader77 (talk)

FOLLOW-UP: Interesting bot problem. Why was bot confused in that edit? (Page translated correctly, and linked article exists). Ponder that (and bots, in general) Proofreader77 (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

(RC) end-of-month items to review

 Done RESEARCH: What's the policy? Proofreader77 (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

ANSWER: Youtube link policy (note also the issue of copyright) Proofreader77 (talk) 19:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The Huggle Message Mystery :) (done)

Look into where that "Stupid" message got inserted. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done} Solved. Fixed. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

NOTE: "Facetious" redirects to off-color humor (done)

 Done

Appropriate way to request deletion of this redirect page? [10]. Asked GG on her talk. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

FOLLOW-UP: Great answer from GG on her talk, and note: {{db-r3}} (and implications) Proofreader77 (talk) 08:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

(COI) Redirect Emily Douglas (done/monitor)

 Done

NOTE: Redirect by interested party User:OlYeller21 from one "Emily Douglas" (Taft) to another. Proofreader77 (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Reverted COI-influenced change in redirect. BUT page may need to be a disambiguation. Follow-up needed. Proofreader77 (talk) 02:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
FOLLOW-UP: Created (debatable) disambiguation. Proofreader77 (talk) 05:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

(RC) Neesy O'Haughan (pass)

What is this? :) Proofreader77 (talk) 07:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

 Not done It might be an interesting case study to see if this could be brought up to biography level. Not now. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) Sarmatians (Poland information being added?) (pass)

Are the changes by Special:Contributions/71.137.254.167 sensible? Proofreader77 (talk) 20:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

 Not done Too much analysis/research to analyze this. Leave to article editors to sort out. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) Front for Victory (classifying a political party) (resolved / but remember issue)

Resolved

See multi (conflicting?) classifications added by 87.9.203.101 ... An interesting case... Already reverted by Jeepday ... But ponder a bit. Proofreader77 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

(RC) Western park, oak cliff (new article / a neighborhood) (done/check later for status) (resolved)

Do "neighborhoods" get an article? (Verify rules about this.)

NOTE: Reverted a (faulty) redirect to disambiguation. If this article is valid, entry on disambiguation page would be needed Western Park (disambiguation) Proofreader77 (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done FOLLOW-UP: Perhaps not the perfect "reason," but added speedy delete tag. BECAUSE: The article/stub as created to disparage the neighborhood with unsourced assertions re gangs. Disparaged police force, local colleges. Proofreader77 (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Resolved

Another editor stripped it to a stub and corrected the capitalization. Proofreader77 (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

(RC) Iraqi legislative election, December 2005 (pass)

Review this edit. [11] Proofreader77 (talk) 00:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

 Not done Seems to hint of POV, but again it would take time to give it fair analysis. Pass. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) what of this category war? (pass)

See [12] and the deletion of the category [13]. Proofreader77 (talk) 00:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

 Not done Perhaps check back and see how this played out. Ip editor's unexplained delete should not win the day, perhaps. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 01:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) 81.129.169.14 rewriting for POV shift , but mischaracterization in edit summary

I.E., misleading edit summary. Proofreader77 (talk) 00:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

(Naturoid) alleged-vandalism

Did you actually look at my edit? – 74  06:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Naturoid

I restored the IP user edits to Naturoid. They appear to be a valid attempt to streamline the article. -- Tcncv (talk) 06:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Response re reversion

Here's what I saw (amidst patrolling,) that caused me to revert:
  1. An undoing of Cluebot with no explanation.
  2. What looked to be a large page reduction.
  3. An image name which sounded like vandalism appearing in red: "Mechaduck" (which was probably what was the "straw" in the calculation to revert).
  4. ip editor (yes, I'm used to seeing sweeping changes by ip editors that need to be reverted)
  5. No discussion/notice of intent to do a sweeping change on the talk page
Also note that if you glance at my talk page, I make a lot of notes while patrolling -- and usually catch errors that I make. This one didn't trigger my "oops" sense, for the reasons above.
NOTE: If patrollers didn't make semi-quick decisions, the mathematics of vandalism control do not compute.
IE: When on patrol, RC patrollers do function a bit like a bot. Based on patterns we've seen and processed, we make a fairly quick decision. Clearly such decisions may be in error -- as may well be the case here. :) Proofreader77 (talk) 06:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

For follow-up

Review this as a case study. (Including Cluebot's trigger in this instance.) Proofreader77 (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) James Ibori (this demands follow up) (done) (oh well, not done yet:)

 Done (Discussed with an admin. Notice removed. Ponder.)

Someone has added this (important or slander?) comment:

"This page is being used to provide credibility to a Nigerian Scam. View with extreme caution."

An interesting case. If true, danger of scam is necessary in the article. BUT will someone take the time to write this correctly. Follow up. Proofreader77 (talk) 07:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(Oh!) Wikinews

See the tag revealed after page was reverted to an earlier version. Much to learn about that. (More notes to come.) Proofreader77 (talk) 18:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

(RC) note (double undoing) Admin notice board entry

Mousing glitch/goof (too easy to do) caused post/undo/undo rather than one. (Wrong action undone in any case, so probably alright ... but verify). Proofreader77 (talk) 01:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

PSNMand reported

But was their own created page's talk. Attempted undoing, but mousing error. Are they blocked? (Check other issues). Proofreader77 (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

(BUT) PSNMand should be reported

Resolved

(for 12 hours:)

See their contributions. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

They are "playing" new page patroller gone bad. Adding speedy delete tags inappropriately. etc. Proofreader77 (talk)
PSNMand has been blocked for 12 hours. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Proofreader77/Archive_02&oldid=1143242392"