Jump to content

User talk:Wifione/Archive 2010 (December)

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

article "Dapa township, Surigao del Norte"

[edit]

I just created an article on Dapa township. There is currently an article on the Municipality of Dapa. Dapa township is a part of the municipality, which in reality is more like a county. What I am finding is that many subjects dealing with the Philippines are just different than what exists elsewhere in the world. Maybe my article should be merged into the municipality article, but I guess other persons will become involved in that decision. Bill Pollard (talk) 05:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went through what you've done and found your effort pretty good. Don't worry about merging the stuff - geography articles are generally not merged (I myself have created stub type village articles) or deleted as there's always scope for them to become encyclopedic. Is there any way in which you might need my assistance? Warm regards. Wifione .......Leave a message 15:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer of help

[edit]

I appreciate the help offer. If I should have more questions, I will ask. In the meantime, I will be busy writing articles about Philippine subjects and places. We were on holiday there recently and I was always trying to find information about places we visited or passed by. Bill Pollard (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Balli Kombëtar

[edit]

JOMN9878 and his IPs are at it again. -- ◅PRODUCER (TALK)12:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page looked unorganised before and had many incorrect statements with no referencing. I don't know why you keep changing it to how it was before.

-JOMN9878

This user had about 5 IPs that edited the exact same view before he created an account so its difficult to stick the standard sets. I know good faith is to be assumed but this is a Balkan related article and more often than not a user is not willing to discuss and simply pushes their views especially when its a nationalist or collaborating force. --◅PRODUCER (TALK) 20:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Producer, thanks for dropping by. Do see the talk page of the article where I've included extensive comments on why I really think that at least three of the reliable sources used are reliable. Why don't you continue your discussions there and in good faith try to include the information in the reliable sources that the ip/user has mentioned? If you agree, then I'll be hands-off the reversion of the article as I'll assume you'll do a sincere job of reviewing the reverts you did. Look, you're the experienced editor- try and guide the new editors and teach them on the best method to understand the differences between reliable and non-reliable sources. I'll wait for your reply on this. Thanks and kind regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 20:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

[edit]

Thank you for your constructive advice! You're helping me become a better contributor and I appreciate the guidance you've provided!Peet (talk) 23:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)nfli3596 —Preceding comment added by Nfli3596 (talk •contribs) 23:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

[edit]
The Signpost: 6 December 2010
Updated every week

Thanks for your guidance at UUA + questions

[edit]

Thanks for your help with my, erm, possibly-not-dislaying-the-highest-level-of-clue UUA reports:

You wrote (x 2):

This noticeboard is for blatant violations of the username policy. Consider taking this report to the conflict of interest noticeboard. Wifione 10:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Now reported at WP:COI/N . Should I manually remove the UUA reports? Or will you, or a bot do that?
Thanks again! --Shirt58 (talk) 11:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O Hai Im in ur usre page 4 teh lulz LOLOLOLOL... (Crikey, is that the best effort at a troll-post I can do?) Soft summer rain is falling on this balmy early summer night where I am. Thanks again for all your help; please do anticipate me dropping in for assistance in the future.--Shirt58 (talk) 12:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure :) Best. Wifione ....... Leave a message 12:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block on User Flobot222

[edit]

You blocked said user saying his name is in violation of WP:U. I only see WP-U having the following provison: unless your account is an approved bot, your name should not end with "bot", which is used to identify bot accounts. First of, it is a should, not a must. Second, the user is rather new. Might it not have been good practice to address him first, pointing to the misleading username section and ask him to consider switching to another name? Which btw would be in accordance with Use common sense in making your choice, and avoid biting the newbies. And third, the nick does NOT end with -"bot", it contains "-bot-".Chartinael (talk) 12:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good block Wifione, this account name gives the impression that it is a bot account. Mo ainm~Talk 12:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it is a good block. The timing is bad. It could be construed as using a potential minor violation in order to block a user some people have issues with at present. It is not inline with WP:U#Dealing with inappropriate usernames while I still stand by the technicality: FLOBOT222 is ###BOT### and not #####BOT. Adress user, point him to why it is misleading, ask him to change, if he refuses, block. But not block without even addressing user first. WP:U clearly states: If the problem is not with the username, but the fact that the username draws attention to another problem such as vandalism, it is usually better to block for the bigger problem and not the smaller one. Chartinael (talk) 12:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's a good block in principle, but unfortunate timing. When an account is an ANI for another matter, blocks like this can look like hounding. As a broader issue, can't we just stop doing this as a "block"? Get it renamed as a "change of username suspension" or something. Blocks are our punitive mechanism (yes, I know) and this sort of "We love you really, but you can't use that name" function shouldn't be presented as so easily confused with them. For that matter, how about a filter on the account creation dialog? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also Flobot222 still matches /.+bot\W*$/ even if it doesn't match /.+bot$/ and that's near enough, IMHO. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what about nicks like: Botanics, Lobotomy, Nobotny, Subotnik, Abott, etc. pp. Maybe his name is Flo(rian)Bot(cher?) - All I am saying, assume good faith, he may not have known that this could be an issue and that is why I feel, WP:U is a bad reason for this block. Chartinael (talk) 13:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They don't match /.+bot\W*$/ user:BigRedRobot would do, but that's getting to an overlap we're fairly justified in excluding. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mo ainm, Andy, good to see you here. Wifione ....... Leave a message 13:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chartinael, thanks for your message. I'll answer your queries sequentially. In username policy, 'should' is generally read as 'must'. You also ask whether the new user shouldn't have been communicated with first, pointing to the username section. In general, I agree with you that one should always make good faith attempts to enable users to change their usernames after discussion rather than attempt straight-up blocks - but in a few username cases, including promotional/bot/clearly offensive usernames, the block is applied first and discussions later. This policy of course excludes established constructive users, with whom, irrespective of their username, it would be appropriate to first discuss, and then block. In the case of this user, as the user is non-established with a clearly inappropriate bot name, I believe that soft-blocking is the appropriate course of action. The block is a soft-block with the autoblock disabled, which allows the editor to immediately choose a new user name. If I had enabled the autoblock, the user wouldn't have been able to create a new username with ease. The editor can of course contest the block and any administrator on Wikipedia would be able to consider the editor's viewpoints positively. Your third point says that the nick does not end with bot, but it contains bot. In my opinion, any username that has (for example) abcd-bot-34 written will be considered as having 'bot' as the suffix. You should steal a look at Bots/Status to understand how many bots have a number suffix. You further mention that this is not a good block. You should appreciate the fact that I have no issues with your views. You further write that "the timing is bad. It could be construed as using a potential minor violation in order to block a user some people have issues with at present." The fact that you yourself have mentioned it, is proof enough to validate your view. Given all this, what can be your next course of action? You could report this block to ANI for a peer review. In case you wish, I can myself report this for a peer review to ANI for your benefit, in good faith. I'll await your views before proceeding on this. Thanks again for leaving your message bringing out the issues that you're viewing. Kind regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 13:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying your position and reasoning. It might be helpful to the user since he seem not established to tell him precisely what to do. Otherwise he might be another disgruntled editor feeling his enemies have teamed up against him. It might also be a good idea to review wording on the policy to include the bot+numerical sequence. To me it is sufficient indication that the nick is misleading, when another editor thinks its a bot, like Mo ainm did. Chartinael (talk) 13:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Let me act on your suggestion and leave a good note for Flobot222. If there's anything else I can assist you on, do feel free to mention now or in the future. Kind regards and best. Wifione ....... Leave a message 13:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

edit warring

[edit]

Hello I made a edit having to do with the CEO's arrestwikileaks and I believe it falls under WP:NPOV and it keeps getting deleted by user:Ianmacm and other users I tried to discuss it on talk but to no avail I admit I might have edit warred myself I'm still new but idf you could look into it I would appreciate it. Please respond on my talk.TucsonDavid(talk) 17:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC) never mind I was helped by another admin. Thanks anyway.TucsonDavid (talk) 18:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please release the article on Russians (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Russians)

[edit]

Hello! Please release the article on Russians (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Russians), it must be edited as it has some mistakes. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by91.79.138.189 (talk) 13:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

[edit]
The Signpost: 13 December 2010
Updated every week

Tis the season

[edit]

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali,Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec10/Balloon}} to your friends' talk pages.

Police body microphone

[edit]

This article was never about the microphone you idiots! It was about the inventor of the microphone From Radio in the lapel, About the equipment a side radio transmitter that qualified the microphone to the lapel, the whole unit! If you read the article, and were more then one yrs. old. You would know that! You need to be removed from wikipedia! Read your comments then read the article, i am ashamed of you! this is a history "OF" ARTICLE 1+1 =2. Police body microphone — Preceding unsigned comment added byMattwic (talk • contribs) 04:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden Vandalism?

[edit]

Hi, I keep watching some certain articles like this, inorder to fight vandalism. Therefore any changes in them appears in my watchlist. But there was an edit or this one that didn't show up in my watchlist.So I wasn't notified about it. Is it "Hidden Vandalism"? Perhaps there is a software to hide them ? If it's true, How am I supposed to find them and react ?!!! *** in fact *** (contact) 08:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi In Fact, good to see you here. This is not quite hidden vandalism. You should first read Watchlist to understand how our watchlist system is organised. Also especially note the fact that perhaps you have chosen in your "preferences" to only display the last edit to each watched page (this is known as "Simple watchlist") - and this can produce misleading results (for example, if the last edit to a page was minor, then there is no indication that a previous non-minor edit occurred). To ensure that all changes are displayed, check the "Expand watchlist..." option on the "Watchlist" tab of your user preferences. Cheers. Wifione ....... Leave a message 05:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! It was very helpful. *** in fact *** (contact) 11:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wifione. You have new messages at In fact's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

[edit]
The Signpost: 20 December 2010
Updated every week

Rollback Rights

[edit]

Thank you very much. I will be sure to conduct my new requested abilities in an appropriate manner on the wiki. Thank you again.--ForgottenHistory (talk) 05:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I.P. Block exemption

[edit]

Hi Wifione I edit from a couple of places one is a school who's uses a static ip of 75.112.150.226 and many students edit from here as anon ip editors I would like to request a ip exemption becuase they are editing pages as s project per thier instructor/ and and have no idea how to correctly edit wiki. Thanks TucsonDavidGOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 16:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Tucson, I would suggest you apply for such an extension only if you face an inadvertent autoblock. There's no need to worry currently. Just make sure you also read our policy on sockpuppetry so that you're aware of future issues that may arise if you edit from shared ips. This is not to say you will try to be a sockpuppet, but only to ensure that in case you are pulled up in the future, you should know that such a policy exists. Please feel free to ask me for any assistance in the future. Kind regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 09:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amber Eyes(short film)

[edit]

Amber Eyes is a homemade film made by children. It is about vampires, who look for a certain girl to bite. The girl is shocked and suprised when the actual thing happens. And the vampires are loving it. This film is about 10 minutes long. And it is full of drama, comedy, romance, and thrills. The title is inspired by vampires' amber colored eyes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by69.228.206.217 (talk) 03:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article "Program of Activities (PoA)"

[edit]

Dear Wifione, I just created an article on PoA's under the name "Program of Activities (PoA)" It's definitly a noteworthy topic, but I had a few technical issues while creating it, and I'm not sure if my sourcing holds to the wiki standard (some of the text is almost identical to the original source, but with approval of the original authors). Anyway, as I have a CoI on anything related to Carbon Trading, please take a look... best (TimS TimS (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hi TimS, I'll check out the article tomorrow. I gave it a very quick look and went into the links. Didn't find them impressive enough to classify the topic as deserving a separate article on our encyclopedia. Yet, let me be the Devil's advocate tomorrow and try and make it notable. Even if the article gets deleted, don't worry, I'll at least check the notability deeply. Best regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 17:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wifione! I added some flesh to the links - hope you see more clearly now why PoAs are noteworthy... best,

(TimS TimS (talk) 11:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC))[reply]

  • Hi TimsS, I've done some structuring. I feel you should learn how to add references. If you're not able to understand after reading up the link I've provided, write back and I'll teach you. In summary, please add references to each and every paragraph of the article so any reader is clear that what has been written is not your own point of view but something that has beenverified through reliable sources. Do please write back for further help. Wifione ....... Leave a message 05:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wifione, I've now added references to all paragraphs. Several (1, 5, 9 & 11) are refering to the same document though. Do you think it's now in a shape to link up with other CDM-related articles? It's really fun to work on wiki articles! I think I will start some more in the field, e.g. I realized that the term "Designated Operational Entity" does not exisit in Wiki... I also found that the article "PoA" links to a Harry Potter Book (Prince of Azkabar) -> I'll try to make a disambigouition page from it and cry for help if I don't manage. (TimS TimS (talk) 08:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]

russians and its talk page

[edit]

Thanks for noticing and taking care of that mess. I did not know who to ask so I had only posted a help notice inWikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests#Russians and Russians Talk page Hmains (talk) 06:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Talk

[edit]

I wanted to apologize to you, I accidentally used AWB clean up on your talk but 2 admins caught my mistakes a reverted them sorry if I caused you any problemsTucsonDavidGOD BLESS THE U.S.A. 22:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

why was my name blocked??

[edit]

why was my name blocked?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.162.245 (talk) 05:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My edit summary

[edit]

There is a blatant sock, all the premises conduct to that (same form of IP, same attacked articles, same edit summaries). He comes again and again almost every day. Tiptoety knows him well too (Iaaasi (talk) 11:41, 27 December 2010 (UTC))[reply]

  • Hi Iaaasi. I'll repeat this. You call the ip a sock again and you will get a warning from me - and this will lead to a definitive block on you. How can you avoid that situation? File an SPI and list all ips/editors you believe are socks along with definitive behavioral evidence. If you're not ready to do that, stop calling editors/ips socks from this moment onwards! I cannot emphasize this more as an administrator who has already left a note on your page. Wifione ....... Leave a message 11:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User:Kerton

[edit]

This appears to have been an erroneous block as there is nothing indicating the name represents a group. I have therefore unblocked the user. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Beeblebrox, thanks for the message and the clarification. No problems with your unblock. The user kerton added Derek Kerton, href="http://www.kertongroup.com", The Kerton Group . I guess I completely missed out the name of Derek Kerton as I noticed only the links added section in the filter log/3505473. However, just a word of caution for you; I realize that Derek Kerton is quite a well known industry personality. Therefore, it would be judicious of you to kindly double check from the user whether he actually is Derek Kerton. Our username policy on well known personalities provides for such a check. OTRS would do this through an email from his individual organisation email account. You could do so too if you kindly can. Thanks for the message once more. Best regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 02:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wifione/Archive_2010_(December)&oldid=1078406883"