User talk:Salvio giuliano/Archive 11

Proposal

Hey, I have seen you about and I have noticed that you are doing a very good job with WP:UAA reports and New page patrolling. I would like to ask you if you are interested in being an admin as I am considering nominating you for an Rfa. Regards, Superchrome (talk) 18:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm flattered and I really want to thank you! However, I'm starting to think it would be superfluous for me to run for adminship. I really don't need the mop for what I do — I might use the blocking button to stop the occasional vandal or to block an account for a uvio or to delete some recently created page, but that's pretty much it —; besides, I haven't even been around for a year yet and, finally, I find myself rather lacking when it comes to content creation. So, all in all, even if I want to thank you for your very kind proposal, I think I'd better wait a tad longer, before running for adminship. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 19:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I understand your decision and for when you may decide to run for adminship, I will still be there for a nom or a co-nom. Kind regards, Superchrome (talk) 19:38, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again; when I decide to run the gauntlet, I'll be sure to let you know! Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 20:01, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I second what Superchrome said. Anytime you're ready to run for adminship, I'd be a willing co-nom. We need more people like you as admins! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 21:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

That's most kind of you too, cymru.lass — and I thank you! —; however, I fear these two would be the only supports I'd manage to get... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 21:39, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. You're a pretty good editor from what I've seen. And you're courteous and always assume good faith. Oh and you always help me fix stuff when I mess up (like that disastrously annoying coordinate template...) Well, if you don't think you'd pass an RfA because of content creation, you should take a look at Wikipedia:Vandal fighters and weigh in at its talk page. It's a proposal to make a user rights group called vandal fighters that has some of the admin privileges associated with vandalfighting. I, for one, am all for it. I hope to one day be an admin, but I'd mostly just use the blocking and deleting tools, which sounds a bit like you. I'm also so not a content creator, due to my inability to write articles --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 21:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Err... Well, I tried to fight tooth and nail for that proposal, but it met with an untimely demise... Oh, I guess it's just the way things go. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 22:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Aw, that's no fun. That would've been a great user rights group... --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 22:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree: that could have been a great way to help with Wikipedia's maintenance; the problem is that the blocking tool is one of the most powerful weapons an admin has in their arsenal and many people were wary of giving it to people who haven't been vetted by (and don't have the trust of) the community; so the idea was not supported... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 22:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

(outdent)

I can definitely understand people being wary of that. I would be, too, I suppose... That's why I supported the idea of having the users wanting the "vandal fighter" user rights group to have to go through an RfA-like process. I guess it would be something like admin-lite or admin specialist. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 23:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, that wouldn't have helped very much, since one of the reason VF was proposed was to avoid the unhealthy environment over at RFAs, these days; and one of the reasons why I so gladly supported it is that it's not an admin-lite, but a very different (and clearly defined) role... You can read the latest news regarding VF here, if you're interested. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)\

Thanks for the link I'll check it out. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 23:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

For the most part it's recrimination, but I think it can be useful to understand why I don't plan on running any time soon... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:26, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. It's too bad RfAs are getting so heated/petty... I also don't like the fact that so much emphasis is being placed on content creation. Some of us (myself not included) can create large volumes of high-quality encyclopaedic prose. But not all of us can. I know if I tried to churn out articles like some people do, they would be massively bad, giving other poor Wikipedians a lot of work to clean up. Don't get me wrong, I'm actually great with writing (if I do say so myself), but it's only my fiction and poetry that's passably good. And my grammar I read the newspaper every morning (shocker! someone actually still reads a newspaper! and a young'un at that! ) and I find myself subconsciously copyediting it... I get funny looks from the people I live and interact with. Actually, come to think of it, that's probably just because I'm certifiable Kidding! Or am I...? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 15:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I had never met a person who copyedits newpapers... But that's only normal, I think, given the fact that I've been known to talk to people on TV (usually, politicians).
That said, I understand people at RFA who oppose people who have absolutely no experience in content creation, because an admin can be called upon to try and solve a content dispute and because they can block an experienced content creator. So, a good admin should be familiar with the stress a dispute can create and should, sometimes, be able to overlook certain uncivil remarks (not outright personal attacks, of course). The creator of an article about to be deleted can react badly and, perhaps, even start venting. A good admin should understand that and not block the editor, unless they become disruptive. That is why some content creation is required: a user who spent their entire wikicareer using Huggle to revert people adding "poop" to articles may not be the best person for the job (since the admin bit allows a user to block other users, and delete and protect articles or bypass full protection). So, I must admit that I understand some opposers. What I do not understand are opposers who require people to have written a given number of DYK or GAs or FAs, because everyone here has their preferences and their particular field(s) of expertise too.
On an entirely unrelated issue, I see you'd like to help out at UAA — good idea! —. If you wish a bit of unrequired advice, when I hang there, I look for inappropriate usernames here and report them with Twinkle (only if they have already edited), tagging for speedy deletions their userpages, if they meet criterion G11, or the article(s) they created. Then I comment the reports I find there and I move reports to the holding pen, after one or two hours since an admin has commented on them, or I remove non-vios, again, after one or two hours since an admin has commented that they are not violations. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 16:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, all of us yell at the people on TV Human nature, I guess.

Hmm... I'd never considered the content-creation debate from that angle... That's some good insight Thanks for the info on how to help at UAA. So the holding pen is an area for username vios that don't need immediate attention, right? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 22:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Usually when an admin uses Wait until the user edits. or Being discussed with the user. on a report, it is then moved to the holding pen, where it remains for a week, so as not to clutter up the UAA main page... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 00:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

So if an admin puts Wait until the user edits. on a report and it is moved to the holding pen, what happens when the user edits? Is the report moved back out? Moved back out only if the user edits controversially? Left in the pen and dealt with there? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:36, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there's a policy regarding that specifically, so here's what I usually do: I review the reports after a week and, if the user has not edited again (or never edited at all), I remove the report as stale; if the user has edited or if there are deleted 'tribs (so that I can't tell when they edited), I drop a line on the talk page of the admin who made the original call and let them handle it from there. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 00:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) All righty! Thanks for the helps. I wanna branch out from just vandalism reversion and copyediting; I feel like there's a lot more I can do around here. (I almost forgot to include "reversion" in that sentence!) --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

That's good! When you're more experienced, you can also apply to become a member of the request an account team... And you could start hanging out at the various noticeboards, where interested users are always needed (such as WP:CNB, or WP:RSN, WP:BLPN, WP:NPOVN or WP:COIN). Even if you don't write articles, you can get a lot of content creating experience and dispute resolution skills there... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 11:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay since no-one seems to be answering this question where I posted it, I'm hoping you can give me some advice (you copyedit, right?)

I'm wondering what tense would be best to use in character bios in reality television shows, such as The Real Housewives of Orange County. If one looked at the situation from a biographical perspective, past tense would be appropriate. But if one looked at it from a writing-about-television perspective, logic dictates that one should use present tense. Right now, the article in question uses both tenses in the character bios. I plan on rewriting the character bios so they all use the same tense, but I can't figure out whether to use past or present tense. Any help appreciated

Any idea? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 01:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I only copyedited twice for two wikifriends who came to me looking for help; however, looking around, I found this. The way I read it, plots and character descriptions should be written in the present tense, whereas all other bits of info (regarding the context of the production) should be written in the past tense. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 11:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

True, that's what I was thinking... up 'til I figured out that we weren't talking about fiction. Or are we? I mean, if you go with the theory that all reality television shows are scripted then we are. But if you go with the theory that they are, in fact, real, then we aren't. Personally, I can't decide --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 14:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

That's a good question! However, I considered "fiction" as a general reference to everything that reproduces an event or a story or a vicissitude, be it either entirely invented or true (as in a reality show); after all, the basic elements of fiction are there: a plot summary (or the events taking place in a given episode), character descriptions and bits of info regarding production... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 14:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, sorry it took me a bit to get back to you on this... I actually got this right when you sent it but I was buried (literally, at one point, the rest of the time just figuratively) in work.... I just realized that I absorbed nothing of these two really important books I was supposed to read When you put it that way, it makes sense. Now if I could only remember which article I was talking about.... --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 14:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia can help, in those cases: you read the article about the book and you paraphrase it. If only Wikipedia had been there back during my secondary school years... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 14:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately that's not gonna help in my situation. I'm in an American Lit class that is supposed to be incredibly high-caliber. I'm using SparkNotes for now, and they seem to be jogging my memory a bit, but I have two concept lists due tomorrow, one for each book. It's kinda nerve-wracking. Heheheh, wow my computer is being slow... It's lagging a fraction of a second for each keystroke... I think I'm low on RAM, cuz my internet's slow as well... Also think my computer's using the hard drive in addition to RAM when I go online cuz there isn't enough RAM. So annoying, and it makes editing the 'pedia hard, cuz I usually have like five to ten tabs open in Safari and two in Firefox, but now I'm limited to four if I want to have any pages load... Grr! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:42, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Reverting

Please make sure you're not reverting to a previously vandalized version. (That quote doesn't exist in the source and, even if it did, would make no sense without any context.) Propaniac (talk) 01:58, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Using Huggle, I hadn't noticed the previous vandalism; however, thanks you for letting me know; I'll try to pay more attention next time. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 11:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

• News and notes: Most linked websites on Wikipedia, New York Wiki-Conference, and more

• In the news: Agatha Christie spoiled, Wales on Wikileaks, University students improve Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: Studying WikiProject Universities

• Features and admins: Featured article milestone: 3,000

• Arbitration report: What does the Race and intelligence case tell us?

• Technology report: Reusability of MediaWiki code, Google Summer of Code: Interwiki transclusion, and more

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

RS/N post

Hi Salvio. I wonder if you would mind too much having a look here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#La_Piazza_de_Giovinazzo. You're the only editor I know of who speaks Italian. You're welcome to comment on the issues, but I really just want you to let me know if you think I've made any significant errors in the translation I have included there. Cheers.--FormerIP (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Your translation is very good and accurate; I've tried to google for La piazza di Giovinazzo (the only error I've seen is that you wrote "de" in the section title, which is French or Spanish ), to see if it's a reliable source, as I had never heard it before, but so far I've come up empty-handed... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Salvio. I corrected the title - I always find it difficult not to slip from Itlian into French because I'm a lot more comfortable with French. --FormerIP (talk) 14:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Great call.

That was really well done. You avoided getting four thousand eyes on it before deletion, which is exactly what would have happened if posted to ANI.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorensen Institute

Thanks for updating me on the conflict of interest that I have with updating my company's wikipage. Will I be able to edit the formatting of the page, as I have attempted to do? As long as I don't edit the content? Page in question: Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership. Bmh8n (talk) 18:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Bmh8n

Of course you can. You can edit that page, you're only asked to be careful not to violate Wikipedia policies (such as the one requiring all articles to be written from a neutral point of view). You can read WP:COI, to familiarise yourself with our policy regarding conflicts of interest. Here, however, are listed some cases of uncontroversial edits, that you can do without fear of violating the COI policy. 18:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC) Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}

Great! I look forward to re-learning the editing techniques. Feel free to look over my shoulder and let me know how I'm doing! Bmh8n (talk) 18:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Bmh8n

I'll be glad to! Welcome again; I hope you'll have fun here. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 18:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Your Request at WP:PERM/ACC

Hi Salvio,

I've reviewed your request and decided to grant you the account creator right. Please remember that the ACC tool is a powerful one, and you will be held responsible for anything that you do wrong. Please also remember that ACC is not a race, so take time and review each request properly. Additionally, please note that this right can and will be, like other user rights removed if you abuse it.

Finally, I'd like to thank you for your hard work and efforts as a member of the Account Creation Team! :)

Kind Regards,

The Helpful One 21:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, thank you! You've really been helpful!

Ok, I know, I know, that was a lousy pun. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 22:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! If you have any questions or encounter any trouble - please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Have a great day, The Helpful One 23:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Jaime Herrera is actually notable

WP:POLITICIAN states, "Politicians who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature and judges," [are notable]. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 22:58, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Err, I forgot to remove the tag, when I contested the speedy... *Cough... Thanks for reminding me! Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

No prob. I thought you had added the notability tag, and had not seen WP:POLITICIAN. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 23:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

My mistake. Someone else added that. Dlohcierekim 23:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it depends on how you see it: I may be the right user, since I didn't remove it; however, I swear I intended to... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for checking into this so fast! I really appreciate it; we're getting close to election time, and I've seen more than one page pop up in the past that looked more like political ads than anything Wiki-notable. Thanks! Scarletsmith (talk) 23:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome; if, in future, you need anything, feel free to ping me here. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

New thread

Why did i get this? : Lets talk bout' it! Did i type bout'? i mean 'bout —Preceding unsigned comment added by Final508 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure I understand your question, but "let's talk 'bout it" is part of my signature and it links to my talk page, where any user can discuss with me about everything I've done.

That said, I'm sorry to be such a spoilsport, but you cannot report someone who's broken your rules, because here, on Wikipedia, we're all supposed to follow the same rules. If you don't want your article to be deleted while still beta version, you can create a draft — I've explained how you can do that on your talk page — and, when it is ready for prime time, move it to mainspace. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 15:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

User Reqluse

User Reqluse seems to be going through Asian and Oceanic fashion houses and designers at a rapid clip, marking them all for deletion. What can be done? http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Reqluce#Your_fashion_statements Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 01:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, for the moment you're doing the right thing: engage the user in constructive criticism — and the user seems to be responding, which is good —; Dabomb, who is a very good and thoughtful admin is discussing with the user, along with you and another editor.

For the moment, my advice would be to continue discussing, to see if this user is willing to change his overzealousness with PROD tags.

Further steps (such as WP:ANI) are only required when a user refuses to discuss their edits.

That said, for what it's worth, I'll keep an eye on their talk page. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 02:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: UAA

It won't let me block the user - it says that the user has been globally supressed - weird. I also don't get the block button, only a 'change block'. (unless I'm making a newbie mistake..) Connormah (talk) 14:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Interesting! I'm not an admin, but I had never heard it before; perhaps a steward or an oversight took care of it: well, good riddance... Sorry for the message, then! Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 14:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem - that was also along the lines of what I was thinking! Connormah (talk) 14:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Can I also trouble you the request to revdel my edit to UAA, so that nobody else sees that pretty username? Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 14:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Salvio and thanks for the welcome --Marsseeker (talk) 16:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! (Awful pun, I know) Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 16:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

• News and notes: Pending changes analyzed, Foundation report, Main page bias, brief news

• In the news: WikiLeaks and Wikipedia; Google–WP collaboration to translate health information

• Book review: Cognitive Surplus, by Clay Shirky

• Dispatches: Tools, part 1: References, external links, categories and size

• WikiProject report: Putting articles in their place: the Uncategorized Task Force

• Features and admins: Bumper crop of admins; Obama featured portal marks our 150th

• Arbitration report: Interim desysopping, CU/OS appointments, and more

• Technology report: Development transparency, resource loading, GSoC: extension management

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Watchlist proposal

We briefly discussed user-defined watchlists on my talk page; well it looks like I'm not the only person with this idea: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Persistent_proposals#.22Categorised_.28user_defined.29.22_or_.22split_.28user_defined.29.22_watchlists.3B_an_idea_previously_proposed_as_.22multiple_watchlists.22 — Timneu22 · talk 15:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

ACC

Excuse me, but how is this a username vio? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:GROUPNAME, usernames should represent a person as an individual and not a group or a company or a product; in that case, the name was that of a publication and so, in my opinion, it violated upolicy. And I was reasonably sure that it represented that publication, because the requester's e-mail address matched one of those listed in the website's "contact us" section. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:15, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

• News and notes: Page-edit stats, French National Library partnership, Mass page blanking, Jimbo on Pending changes

• In the news: Public Policy Initiative, Houellebecq plagiarism?, Article revisions as book

• Public Policy Initiative: Experiments with article assessment

• Sister projects: Biography bloopers – update on the Death Anomalies collaboration

• WikiProject report: Getting the picture – an interview with the Graphic lab

• Features and admins: "Magnificent" warthog not so cute, says featured picture judge

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

• From the editor: New ways to read and share the Signpost

• News and notes: Dutch National Archives donation, French photo raid, brief notes

• In the news: Rush Limbaugh falls for Wikipedia hoax, Public Policy Initiative, Nature cites Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: All Aboard WikiProject Trains

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Dispatches: Tools, part 2: Internal links and page histories

• Arbitration report: Discretionary sanctions clarification and more

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Your Signature

Hi there, Just wanted to know which font and color you using in your signature, I would like to have same one, its looks nice :). (leave talkback) KuwarOnline ^Talk 06:10, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Ehm, I must admit I copied the code from someone else's sig some time ago... However, here it is: <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml"> '''[[User:Salvio giuliano|Salvio]]'''</span>. Sorry I can't be more of help... Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 14:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) KuwarOnline ^Talk 15:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow, Salvio, everybody loves your signature, don't they? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 13:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Howdy, cymru.lass and thanks! How are things? Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 11:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Pretty good. Haven't been on-wiki as much lately due to legalized sadism ostensibly enacted to better my mind You? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 03:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I've not been on-wiki much either, but in my case it was because of a slightly more pleasant reason . Sadly, I'm back. Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 23:18, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I feel your pain, good sir If only holidays could last ten times longer... --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 22:13, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Usernames in holding pen

Do what you like ... neither of them has edited since those reports. Daniel Case (talk) 13:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)