Jump to content

User talk:Xeno/Archive 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23→Archive 25

Happy New Year

I would like to wish you and your family a Happy New Year Xeno. :)--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 10:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and to you as well =) –xenotalk 14:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Mk V

How much work is involved in setting up Xenobot for a request? In other words, when is it better to do a job manually rather than submitting a request for the bot to do it? I'm looking for something like do the job manually when there are less than 50 or 100 or 500 or 1000 articles that will be tagged. I don't want to overburden you or the bot with requests that would be cheaper to do manually. --NJR_ZA (talk) 13:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Not too hard to set it up. Anything more than 25 articles I would say go ahead and file a request. –xenotalk 14:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks --NJR_ZA (talk) 14:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Question about User:IXIA

Happy new year! Since you seem to be well active in the Files space, I was wondering what you thought of this user. He seems to upload many files and they all seem to lack a good fair use rationale. This poses a question because there are over 100 messages on his talk page on fair use missing, files deleted etc etc etc. There does not seem to be any good warning that a non-admin could give. Any advice? Thanks! --Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 20:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

It appears that haven't done anything with files going back to about Feb '08 and are now just receiving messages from bots periodically. You might want to just leave them a hand-written note that explains why source, licensing, and adequate fair use rationales are important given our WP:NFC policy. –xenotalk 14:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks. --Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 20:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Psycological Profile.pdf

I see that you rejected the speedy deletion on File:Psycological Profile.pdf. It's clear that this file is a load of rubbish: complete nonsense. What tag should I use? ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 21:49, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It's only being used in userspace so its composition isn't really important as long as its not an attack image. It doesn't appear to meet any of the speedy criteria to my best understanding. WP:FFD if you think it is disruptive and needs to go. –xenotalk 21:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
But G3 "...includes blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including images intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism." The key phrase for me here is "including images intended to misinform". What the chart represents is totally untrue but is presented in a factual chart-like manor: it is intended to misinform. I'd say that it meets G3; but you're the one with more experience. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 21:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
But it's only on a userpage. I could put up an image on my userpage claiming that I was the second coming of Christ and I doubt you'd find an admin willing to fulfill it as G3 (they might try to have me desysopped under L2 procedures though ;>). Note the image in context is prefixed by the words "My psychological profile in a flow-chart form created by me...", so I don't see how it's intended to misinform anyone. –xenotalk 21:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I see :o) ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 22:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

When it says "This does not require a rating"

it shouldn't have a rating! Full stop. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It does not require does not mean it may not have one if there is a reason. Also, as Jeni pointed out, that verbiage is referring to the class rating and not the importance. Please stop. –xenotalk 22:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
The point is that that rating is being used so that Lincolnshire can have undo influence over the Lincoln page Purplebackpack89 (talk) 22:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I doubt that anyone is swayed by their "high importance" rating. Perhaps they feel it is high-importance because it is a primary path to an article of top-importance to their project. I've already collapsed the banners so any purposed influence you feel they may have had should now be moot. Now cut it out and please present your arguments rather than causing disrupting to the top business. –xenotalk 22:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:Lincolnshire have not entered the discussion yet, and so far no one has given the WP:Lincolnshire project tag as a reason for keeping the page as a dab. Nev1 (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, this straw man seems to be fairly vacuous. –xenotalk 22:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Bias notification

JHunterJs edit here seems a little over the line in terms of creating A) A battlefield situation (presenting opposing sides, acctually through misinformation) and B) Prejudicing views before they get to a discussion. --Narson ~ Talk • 22:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If JHJ's edit is WP:POINT, then so is notifying any project that is only concerned with one line of the disambiguation. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 22:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Now, don't you find it ironic you said your edits to a user's talk page was none of my business right before commenting here? And acctually, I was more referring to WP:CANVASS. I'm fine with them being notified. Not fine with using phrasing that biases people on way or the other. Inviting people to the discussion with 'Save this, it is brill' is not the way forward and daft. --Narson ~ Talk • 22:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I actually have to head out right now, I'll have to look at this later or tomorrow. Best, –xenotalk 22:26, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Looks like Jeni already left them a message here [1], I have followed it up thusly. If this is an isolated incident I would be minded to let it drop. –xenotalk 14:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I did not say anything like "Save this, it is brill." My statements there still appear neutral. Identifying that a disagreement exists is not biasing, and Purplebackpack89's pointed jibes have certainly caused some ticklish situations for those who happen to agree with the application of primary topic there even while we dislike his attacks (which help sensitive other editors who might then make counter-attacks of their own). It has been pointed out that my statement had a factual error (the people arguing for the status quo were not from the Linconshire project), but that is a different thing. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Your note begged the question and stated that Abraham Lincoln was the primary topic whereas the whole point of the discussion is to determine the answer to that question. A suitably neutral note would have been "There is currently a requested move discussion that would benefit from the input of WP:DAB members. Please see Talk:Lincoln#Requested move". No more, no less. –xenotalk 14:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm. That's a cut-and-paste of my move proposal. When proposing a move, the proposer gives a rationale ("because ...") -- that is, that's why I made the proposal. I proposed it as a controversial move. Restating my reason for proposing the rule there still doesn't appear to be non-neutral, but I will try to trim down such recaps later, as long as it doesn't hinder the message. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Your proposal takes a side, your note pointing people to it should not. –xenotalk 14:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. If I had a time machine, would wrapping the cut-and-paste with an "I said ..." satisfy? -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
No... not really - you would still run the risk of prejudicing opinions of commentors before they got there. The note I suggested above would be bang-on, though (admitting my bias in saying so! ;>) –xenotalk 15:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Alrighty. Avoiding making the same statement that the reader is going to see when they click through the link to the move request discussion seems like an oddly arbitrary line, but I'll stay on that side of it. -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
No doubt your proposal will likely be the first thing they read there; but the spirit of WP:CANVASS is to ensure they arrive to the discussion with an open mind. Best to err on the side of caution and keep the note very simple to avoid even the appearance of partisanship in the canvassing. Thanks for understanding. –xenotalk 15:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

← If I may stick my nose in, this is what I wrote on the WP Lincolnshire talk page, which in my opinion is very neutral, along the lines of "x is happening at x, comments welcome". It's the structure I use when notifying any wikiproject of discussions. Feel free to copy the style :) Jeni (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, that would work too. While unlike my suggestion it does mention the proposed new location, it doesn't provide or support the impetus. –xenotalk 15:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Niko Bellic

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Niko Bellic. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niko Bellic. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Lincoln page - thank you

Goodness, we at WP:Lincolnshire had been informed that there was a discussion on a 'move' for the article so after seeing that a long winded dabate was on the way on our talk page I decided to take a look for myself, what a mess that Wikiproject tagging section ended up in! I'm awfully frustrated that our WP hadn't even been consulted about that discussion - we were are fundamental part of it, yet WP:Nebraska was. I'd like to say thanks for ending everything, I have two questions, though - can WPs tag disambig pages and can editors tag pages in the name of a WP if they're not members? 95jb14 (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC), a member of WP:Lincolnshire.

Yes WikiProjects can tag disambiguation pages if they want to. And I suppose editors could tag pages for projects they don't hold membership in - but they really shouldn't unless it's a clear cut case! While you're here, you should probably consult other members of your project to determine the proper importance rating of the Lincoln dismabiguation page. If you all agree that it is "high" , then that's fine as well. –xenotalk 21:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

71.247.26.71

Thanks for taking care of that vandal so quickly. Much appreciated. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Obviously deserves no quarter. –xenotalk 00:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

User:hopiakuta

Hello. I was wondering if you could explain a bit about User:hopiakuta. What does the template mean? Why does their userpage look so bizarre?--Stinging Swarm talk 01:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Xeno can give you a more accurate answer but for now I found this. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 03:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
They are a well-meaning user whose output is sometimes bizarre... I'm not sure if the above link is accurate in terms of the reason but it's a possibility. –xenotalk 16:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

I was wondering if you could do a review of me before I throw myself to the meatgrinder that is RFA. I'm planning on running when I get the green light from somebody, whether it be now or a few months, but I would prefer doing so soon as I will be going to college again in two weeks. Thanks a lot. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I had left you a reply on this topic on SoWhy's talk page. And actually, seeing you impatiently hopping from talk page to talk page asking for reviews reminds me of last August. Amalthea 12:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh sorry about that Amalthea, I didn't go back to look at his page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
So it was you who had that very encouraging advice. I might as well wait then. The only reason I am pondering running so soon is that I don't really like bugging the administrators over quite trivial tasks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Nevermind about the request Xeno, as I was a bit lost there on that. Sorry for your time. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
No problem, I think the advice Amalthea gave you is sound. No rush, get it right. The chance of passing RFA goes down significantly after the 4th failed attempt. –xenotalk 16:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
That, and looking back, I am a much better editor. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Admin work

Hah, thanks for dealing with the reports :). Can't say the thought of another RfA hasn't crossed my mind :), I was actually planning on running again sometime last year, but whenever I think about it I still think I need to hang around this place some more. Maybe sometime later in 2010 :) - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:45, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't rush into it, but I think you'd probably have a good showing in the near future. I've watchlisted the page. Cheers, –xenotalk 20:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q4 2009)

Could I trouble you and your awesome bot for another delivery? (Guyinblack25 talk 20:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC))

Is it that time already? Sure, no problem =)  Doing... –xenotalk 20:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 6 — 4th Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2009, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.
All  Done. Cheers, –xenotalk 21:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

autoarchive of WT:SOCK

Hi Xeno, perhaps you could help with the autoarchiving of WT:SOCK? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I assume the bot was bummed that its archive page was turned into a redirect. I've made an attempt at fixing it, you'll have to wait until tomorrow to see if that really was the cause. Amalthea 13:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Amalthea - and you're probably right as to the cause. –xenotalk 13:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse

Hello Xeno. I am letting you know that I have restored semi-protection to the Mickey Mouse article after a request was posted on WP:RFPP ([permalink). I saw that you had previously removed semi-protection at the request of another editor. Please review my action and if you believe a different course of action is appropriate, feel free to adjust the protection level as you see fit. Thank you. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 01:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm fine with that. Unfortunately some of our topics are simply perennial targets =\ –xenotalk 13:40, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Bah

I almost drowned in the watchlist flood. :( –Juliancolton | Talk 16:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you going for the record for "Most user rights changes"? Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 16:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
heh... No, the motivation is more to make this list more useful in terms of identifying an active EFM (see also here). Do feel free to re-enable the userright if needed, though. Sorry 'bout the watchlist flood =) –xenotalk 16:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
I'd been wondering when that change would come in - thanks for doing the administrative work of clearing out that user-rights group. I certainly won't miss the userright - I regularly view them, my knowledge of actually writing edit filters extends roughly to "being able to use a keyboard", and i'm sure quite a few others are in the same boat. ~ mazca talk 22:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
No problem. Just as a caveat, after doing this I realized there's still some things that are (probably erroneously) hidden from us admins who don't hold EFM - see bugzilla:22033. Probably not a big deal. –xenotalk 16:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The whole idea here is stupid. If you want a list of active and willing abuse filter managers, make one. But the software-generated list will never be useful. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

*shrug* It's more useful than it was two days ago. –xenotalk 19:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Next time you have an AbuseFilter question, contact Keegan. It'll be fun to watch. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 19:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

tips

that's two useful things I've learned from you today:

  • licensed images need to link to the image, not something else (never knew that, but it makes sense when you think about it)
  • the anchor reminder (i knew that, but I've reached the age where I'm starting to forget things faster than I'm learning new stuff)

thanks, --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The anchor isn't really crucial, but people might be confused clicking those older anchors in their watchlist. And "ORTS" is just too annoying a typo not to click. ;> –xenotalk 00:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars image (Spirits)

Just to let you know that it seems Xnacional (talk · contribs) was, until recently, still reverting our edits on the images, largley without any edit summary, even though the other one has now been deleted. For now, his edits seem to have stopped, although it's a possibility that the user might upload another version of the image again. --The Taerkasten (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed... The lack of edit summary explaining their actions (as well as the misleading edit summary 'image is not watermarked' ... missing the word anymore) mildly irritating, but I didn't bother to leave them a message on that. Thanks for the note. –xenotalk 14:18, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I think this is getting a bit out of hand, now. The user is still doing it, and I'd rather avoid becoming involved in an edit war. Something should be done. --The Taerkasten (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
It seems that the user reuploaded the deleted image, and copied the FUR from Image:Spirits.jpg, and has replaced it with that version on all three articles. --The Taerkasten (talk) 12:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Which image do you think is better? –xenotalk 14:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I think Image:Spirits.jpg should stay. It was the first one, before all this mess began, and it's clear that it's important in those three articles.--The Taerkasten (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:PENNA

Wow! I am impressed with your work on my request. Thank you so much! The bot is pretty cool. --Blargh29 (talk) 08:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision newsletter

Hello,

We have a new edition of the WikiProject Eurovision newsletter ready for delivery. However, as you can see at User talk:Grk1011, our normal method of delivery is out of action. I was wondering if your bot, User:Xenobot, could do it for us. It needs to go to everyone on this list, usually including those marked inactive. Many thanks, Camaron · Christopher · talk 11:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, no prob. This is  Done. Cheers, –xenotalk 14:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again Xeno. Camaron · Christopher · talk 17:51, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Running for adminship

If I were to run for adminship right now, would you support or oppose, and why would you do so? —MC10 (T•C•GB•L•EM) 02:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I might consider opposing for using a subpage to subvert the signature guideline on length. =) –xenotalk 13:42, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Why would you restore a personal attack? I used rollback because of the attacking nature. Can you help me understand what was wrong with it? I rarely use rollback...except in blatant cases of vandalism as I thought that was. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Personal attack? It falls short. Tan is a showoff! Looking so über-cool in those shades. =) Anyhow you should probably leave the message for him to deal with - given that it's about a currently unresolved matter... –xenotalk 17:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I can do that. I still think it was a appropriate use of the tool technically speaking, but I understand what you mean. Thanks for your quick response. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
No problem and I understand rollback was used in good faith but err on the side of caution. And know that admins have thick skins so if there is some issue that a borderline message turns upon, it's best left to them to address. –xenotalk 17:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

User pages

See Wikipedia talk:User page. Dougweller (talk) 17:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, commented there. –xenotalk 17:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi dear Xeno. The files uploaded by User:Amir.Hossein.7055 [2] seems to be tagged wrong. nothing proofs that he's the copyright holder of these files as there's no metadata and they're just like low resolution pictures used by news websites. regards Amirreza talk 17:55, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hm I think the best thing to do is take it to WP:FFD. I am not too well-versed with file procedures. –xenotalk 17:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Thx. :) Amirreza talk 17:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Irrational Games

They recently changed their name from 2K Boston/2K Australia to Irrational Games. That is right they went back to their original name. It is best to update the article too. Here is an RS if you don't believe me Gameinformer --SkyWalker (talk) 04:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xenotalk 16:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

MFD?

Xeno, what was all that with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:StatusBot/Status/Xenocidic and this? Just wanted to make sure we were on the same page. Useight (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I was going to seek mass deletion because it seemed that the pages were taking up spots at WP:Most frequently edited pages, then I realized that it was just because that report hadn't been updated in a while. So I decided to let sleeping dogs lie, instead. Cheers, –xenotalk 21:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. Useight (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Halo: Reach

Xeno, I found some screenshots of the Feb GI with the Halo Reach info. I can't access Imageshack, so it'd be great if you could post what you see.

Thanks,

Avenged 521 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avenged521 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I had to redact the links per WP:LINKVIO but hopefully someone else has access to the article and can add the material. Thanks, –xenotalk 16:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Yobot's BRFA for inheriting classes

I found some time and I filled in a BFRA. Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 10. Can you check and comment? -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. –xenotalk 17:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Need a copy of a deleted page

Xeno, I found your name on the list of admins and need your help. I'm trying to create a fact-based page on the software company, nCircle. It seems some overzealous marketing interns created a bad page 2 years ago and an admin now just deletes any page created, regardless of the merit of the page. Full disclosure: I work in their Engineering department and not marketing, and just want something that is comparable to our 2 competitors, whose employees are allowed to create their own pages (Qualys and Rapid7). I just want a copy of the deleted page so I can create a draft instead (oops) and get it reviewed by editors so we're following all the rules. Thanks, hope you can help. Rgaushell (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

See User:Rgaushell/NCircle and WP:CORP. Please don't remove the {{userspace draft}} until it's moved into mainspace and please don't move it into mainspace until it meets the requirements at WP:CORP. Thanks, –xenotalk 16:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Vandal and Sockpuppet

User:69.2.149.125 and User talk:S33k4ndd3str0y Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Normally I'd be a stickler and say they haven't vandalized past the final warning, but I'm in a rouge mood today. –xenotalk 18:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
We haave yet another Anon IP on the page KBPI. Can we page protect? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –xenotalk 18:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Kids have short attentions, thanks! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Protection of Thank Me Later

Although you stated on RFPP that you protected it for a week, the protection didn't show up in the page history, meaning you might've forgotten. In fact, right after I requested protection, an IP added vandalism. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Xeno on an iPhone

Please could you update the user pages to show that Xeno on an iPhone is an alternative account of yours. I thought someone was trying to assume your identity and so I reported it to WP:UAA[3]. But it seems that it's actually yourself[4]. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 22:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done - sorry for the inconvenience. –xenotalk 23:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Good luck if you ever want to edit in England - see this BBC story. Pointillist (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure the roaming charges would keep me away from an endeavour like this =) –xenotalk 23:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Some airtime suppliers offer cheaper roaming if you sacrifice a cockerel during the vernal equinox at Stonehenge (I think I have that right—but the small print is very small if you have a UK iPhone). Alternatively just drop us a line if you are visiting here and the UK wikipedians will get you connected. Perhaps you could bring some snow as all of ours seems to be melting. - Pointillist (talk) 23:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Off the reservation

Fragmented from here

It isn't racist language, Xeno. I presume you are referring to some sort of slight against Native Americans. However, the term has been int he Ameircan lexicon for a very long time, and has none of the racist overtones that you suggest and in fact, refers more to the intelligence field than anything else. Examples of definitions include those from Urban Dictionary, The phrase isn't any more racist than, say, using the term "hooligans" (Irish drunkards), "hip hip hooray" (anti-Semitism), "barbarian" (xenophobia), "bugger" (Bulgarian homosexual), "gyp" (gypsy), picnic (refers to lynching Black folk) and of course "vandalism" (Germans). While words and phrases may have racist origins, their usage often evolves well past the icky origins. So, unless we are going to replace the word vandalism with something wholly less racist, I think "off the reservation" is okay to use. I've removed your comment as it inappropriately - and incorrectly - designated me as a racist. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

See http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/politics/81346847.html - if not outright "racist", it is at the very least insensitive and a poor choice of words. Let's keep this in one place. Your talk page or mine? –xenotalk 20:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
And yeah, I've removed it again as disruptive and superfluous to the discussion (citing WP:REFACTOR). I do tend to consider being called a racist disruptive, especially in the absence of discussion. As the topic being discussed there tends to grow heated, throwing gas on the fire (like calling someone a racist) tends to be seen as disruptive. Please do not add it back in, or I'll be obliged to take up the topic elsewhere. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I think TreasuryTag's comment to you sums up my feelings on this. –xenotalk 20:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate your comments as well as your striking the comments. I respect your feelings, but citing TT as a source of anything reasonable isn't going to carry a lot of weight with me. I flat-out don't like the guy, believing him to be a drama troll. Out of respect for you, I'll alter the phrasing. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The more insults I receive from you, Arcayne, be they on my talkpage or Xeno's, or yours, or on ANI, the less insulted I am, and the more benevolent. ╟─TreasuryTag►CANUKUS─╢ 21:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Omg, please tell me you were kidding? lol - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Re the outside the lines? Yes, kidding of course. Though I'm not sure the analogy works - kids colour outside the lines until they learn not to. They usually don't go back to messy colouring =). –xenotalk 21:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Unless they become modern artists. Then they paint soup cans on trash cans. ;) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:18, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Um

You do know this guy is a spammer, right? Spammers aren't welcome anywhere, --TS 00:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I didn't click thru the website, so I'm not quite sure if he is "a spammer" or if he has just been recently spamming a link to his website. If it's the latter, this doesn't necessarily mean he won't one day become a positive contributor. We can try to steer them in the right direction in the spirit of WP:DBTN. –xenotalk 00:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

[5] I was fixing it, but I'm slow with the copy/paste... apparently slower with remembering how to properly edit. ;) Lara 20:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries... It may have actually been the broken edit conflict handler, this happens to me a lot! –xenotalk 20:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

Good morning. I just stumbled upon the userpage of User:CanadianCaesar (inactive administrator) and noticed that the last edit date in the {{notaround}} message is inaccurate. Would you mind changing it to April 10, 2009? I can't do it because the page is fully protected, and I chose a random administrator from Wikipedia:Highly Active Users/North America. Thanks! Schfifty3 13:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done Glad to see the HAU page is still of use =) –xenotalk 16:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Not much activity

Not much activity on this desolate wasteland you currently call...a talkpage =B. Where did all the entertainment go, there was once cinemas, resturants, bars, shops and, unless I'm very much mistaken, a red light districted near the clock. Must be so boring without me asking eleventy million question everday =P 'The Ninjalemming' 17:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to dial back my activity somewhat. I also let MiszaBot archives threads more quickly so it looks nice 'n clean. =) Aren't you a little young for the red light district? hehe... –xenotalk 18:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep, which is why I always looked on it in disgust, did you even know it was there? I haven't been active really at all due to lots of work going on and not really much computer time for the work let alone wikipedia (Assassin's Creed 2, L4D2 and COD 6 don't really aid it either =P). I will try sometime later this year as some of the activity on here is epically funny. 'The Ninjalemming' 18:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Loved AC2. Did you hear they're making some kind of spin-off? (More Ezio)... –xenotalk 18:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
More Ezio!? WHEE, Ezio is da best, especially as I was compared to him the other day due to certain energetic activities involving jumping and runing. But where'd you hear this, mes want to learn more, is it on the 'pedia? Mind you I reckon the DLC could be set in the 'corrupt' years, so we'll get to see that intresting thing involving the Forli Lady who get's Ezio on the boat to Venetizia/Venice; and by see I mean know more of, not like full graphic imagery. =D All in al AC2 = Da shizze, have now finished it twice except didn't get all the feathers and Truth files last time round so am doing it this time. Did you know you can learn special moves, I only learn't today but don't know where? 'The Ninjalemming' 18:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
See [6]. I learned about the special moves after I beat the game and was cleaning up the last few cheevos. You need to learn or buy the move at the trainer at the villa. –xenotalk 18:36, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, it does actually say under Assassin's Creed II#Sequel about the game as well (did you put it there?), and my suspisions about the DLC have also een confirmed as you can see by the DLC sub-heading on the same page. =P Unfortunatly I won't have live til March =( 'The Ninjalemming' 18:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Me add content? You must be new here! –xenotalk 22:33, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
New again definatley. I forgot your whole scope, doing the admin work to the max. And hey look, activty is below; let's just hope noone wants to bring the brothels back to town. Oh yeah, and I now have all 'The Truth' Videos, which made me want the next game to be out now more then the actual end of the main game. Also I reckon in the AC spin-off about Ezio he would have started a new religion called the 'Desmondians' worshipping 'The Great Desmond', as he has no idea whop Desmond is. 'The Ninjalemming' 16:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Status didn't work

I saw all that stuff once I found out it didn't work, and decided it wasn't worth it. But thanks.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. =) –xenotalk 22:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for helping me with my sig! iBentalk/contribs 23:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Damn Xeno, another? gratz... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey! You wonder how I feel, Adolpus79? I haven't gotten a single one... Haha! (I give many though)!--iBentalk/contribs 00:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
You've only been here since September, you'll get them... I've been here almost 4 years, and only have 3, one because I didn't have any, and another one for answering a new users question... LOL - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Ben... 'Sup Adolphus =) –xenotalk 00:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiCup, man... scratching for whatever points I can get... LOL - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Disabling editing sections on userpages

Thanks for answering me on J.delanoy's talk page. I couldn't think of another administrator to ask that question to, so I chose him. I've updated my user page with the "__NOEDITSECTION__" code. Again, thanks! SchfiftyThree(Public) 17:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem =) –xenotalk 17:15, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

How would I tag Window 98 games for deletion? Under what category?-- iBentalk/contribs 22:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Probably best just to do this. –xenotalk 22:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I'll tell the user WIkipedia is not a collection of lists.-- iBentalk/contribs 22:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
The user User:Huge234 seemed to keep recreating this page. Earlier you redirected it to Index of Windows games or something like that. I can't find the history for that; this user played with the software somehow. It is tagged for speedy deletion; although it hasn't been deleted nor has the author added {{hangon}}. This user is being stubborn ( I'm am not writing a dictionary; I am writing a quick reference to games that work on windows 98. I will continue to do so till the end of time! --Huge234 (talk) 23:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC) ). I have warned them to WP:AGF, be civil, look at WP:NOT but they aren't responding. I appreciate your help!-- iBentalk/contribs 03:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
You redirected it; someone reverted it... What next?!?!-- iBentalk/contribs 03:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Please delete it or protect it. Thanks!-- iBentalk/contribs 03:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Looks like they stopped for now. –xenotalk 17:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk page

I voluntarily deleted those edits myself, which I'm certainly allowed to do if I so choose for my own personal reasons. There's no rule stating that a person can't delete their old user talk — the rule only states that it's not generally done as a matter of course, not that it can never be done for any reason. Bearcat (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

No, I think you are mistaken ("user talk pages are generally not deleted, barring legal threats or other grievous violations that have to be removed for legal reasons; however, exceptions to this can be and are made on occasion for good reason (see WP:Right to vanish)". None of the above applies here. Were a regular user to request their talk page history deleted, they would be declined. Just because we are administrators doesn't mean we have special privileges to hide our talk page history from view. Feel free to seek clarification on this, however, if you believe I am mistaken. –xenotalk 15:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
The word "generally", by definition, does not mean that it's never done or that it's disallowed — it merely means that it's not an everyday sort of practice. It's not about "special privileges", either; there simply isn't any reason why anybody's user talk page history needs to be permanently visible. Nobody is ever going to need to revisit talk page conversations I had in 2005, for instance. And user talk pages are frequently deleted for a variety of reasons that aren't limited solely to user vanishment — they certainly don't need to be deleted twice a week as routine cleanup, but there's no rule anywhere stating that deletion can never take place or that a user talk page's entire edit history has to stay permanently in plain view. Bearcat (talk) 02:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
From past experiences, I still think you are mistaken. Please seek clarification at WP:AN or a simar venue. –xenotalk 03:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

How dare you...

...beat me to it! Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 18:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

hehe =) Oh, new trick {{diff2}} Thanks ! =) –xenotalk 18:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Tagging

It is only recently that it has come to light to me that tagging should not show unused fields. I now tag with only tags being used. It would be good in this regards if the main tag template mentioned only to use the fields required. Even though, when using all the fields and leaving the blank fields in the edit page, helps another editor fill them in when quantities may be known for them. Sorry about the hassle. Thank you for fixing the one that you found. SriMesh | talk 01:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh good gravy!!! What a silly error, and obviously I had used copy and paste to tag those articles. Thank you for your time again! Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 02:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
The Wikignome Award The Wikignome Award
Thank you!SriMesh | talk 02:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

no problem -- thanks! =) –xenotalk 02:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

three unblock requests

==Huh?== Where is it written that a user only gets 3 unblock requests and then they should be locked out of their talk page? When they are being entirely civil?–xenotalk 03:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


It's not written, but it's been informal policy among those of us who review unblock requests regularly, that the limit is three, or at least three making more or less the same argument for unblock, depending on the length of the block and the frequency of the unblock requests, among other factors. Essentially it's a way of limiting forum shopping. Yes, he was being entirely civil about it (I assume we're talking about Sendalldavies?) but at the same time he was basically saying the same thing over and over, with the implication that he would sock again, and in such a case where two other admins have already reviewed the case and declined the unblock I decided that we didn't need to keep hearing about it, no matter how nicely he asked.

I see you unblocked based on Checkuser, which is a tool I don't have, so I defer to your judgement there. Daniel Case (talk) 04:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Well to be clear, I unblocked based on the complete lack of checkuser. They seem to have been labelled a sock just because some SPAs showed up to vote in an article they wrote, and that's just not on. –xenotalk 13:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Requests

Hey, I just put a few more bot tagging requests for Xenobot. I hope that I didn't overstep my bounds by asking too much. Just get to them when you can. The three sports projects (Pittsburgh Steelers, Philadelphia Phillies, Philadelphia Flyers) should be pretty small. Those lists are pretty short, and I don't think they need to be vetted. Let me know if you have any questions.--Blargh29 (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Did you gather consensus from the projects for the auto-assessing? –xenotalk 23:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I have posted notices at the project talk pages. (the diffs are at the request page). The WP:PITTSBURGH seems pretty inactive, but hopefully this bot tagging drive can stir up some interest. As far as the WP:STEELERS, WP:PHILLIES, and WP:FLYERS, I have no idea how active they are. If there is no objection after a few days, can we presume consensus on autoassess, per WP:SILENCE?--Blargh29 (talk) 21:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes as long as no one has a problem with it. –xenotalk 22:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Your offer

Xeno - I appreciate the offer you made to userfy any of the non-contentious BLP articles for sourcing here. As I see it, all of the unsourced articles are being thrown out wholesale as "trash", and what you're offering is the ability for individuals to peek into said trash to ensure that nothing of value was thrown out in the mass purge - should some china or silverware be found amongst the rest of the greasy take-away containers and coffee grounds, some kind soul (such as myself) can polish it up and put it back in the cabinet. I think this is a great idea and I thank you for offering to do it, however the problem is that, not being an admin, I cannot actually see any of the deleted articles. How can I determine what's sourceable but neglected compared to what should remain deleted? I'm able and willing to pull up my sleeves and start sorting through the trash, however the bags are all sitting behind a locked door. (PS I know my analogy leaves much to be desired, but I watched Hoarders last night and the connection was striking).... --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 14:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually I think the analogy is spot on. Though, in Hoarders, they allow the person time to pick and choose what they think needs to be kept. Looks like we ran out of time for that here, though. What I would suggest is looking through the deletion log and maybe plugging the names into Google News/Scholar search to see if anything pops up. You could also try to look at the Google cache of the deleted Wikipedia page (e.g.) –xenotalk 14:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Good call, thanks fo the advice and I'll let you know if anything pops up. I'm also making my way through the current PROD list to try to catch any neglected diamonds in the rough before they disappear. Don't get me wrong, I think that any event that put a spotlight on the sorry state of BLPs is a Good Thing, I would just like to avoid re-inventing the wheel where possible. If you come across any striking deleted articles while The Great Purge continues, please feel free to drop me a line and I can see what I can do in regards to sourcing it. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
P.S. I just realized that this entire BLP fall-out happened during WP:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd. Oh, the irony.... Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 20:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it is very ironic that the biggest dramafest in recent memory happened during the dramaout. I wonder, did the pledgees stay out of it? =) –xenotalk 20:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Answer. Useight (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
<ec> A brief perusal of the list would suggest yes; I imagine when they return to the drama boards tomorrow it will not be unlike opening your front door to find out armageddon had occured whilst you slept. Jaw slack, eyes wide, wondering how it all came about... Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 20:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks very much for that. I just wish people would stop arguing and start sourcing. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

You and me both, friend. I did contribute a little bit to the effort. Would hate to see a premiere of NFLD get deleted for dearth of sourcing! –xenotalk 18:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Chegg

I was going to fix up the Chegg article one of these days. My daughter rented books from them. So far, so good. I agree it's all spam right now but I'll try to get it in better shape, less advertise-y. But right now I'm working on other stuff. But if I want to write on the Talk:Chegg page, it got deleted. So where do I write?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Please go ahead and write on the page. It was deleted because there was no useful content there. –xenotalk 14:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanx.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Copy of a deleted article

Hey xeno. Could you provide me with a copy of List of longest-lasting empires? SwarmTalk 23:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Check your email. –xenotalk 19:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! SwarmTalk

Blocked?

Am I still blocked . . . I have stopped vandalising now. In fact I corrected one of the books from the Bone series too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasad9008 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but it doesn't look like you were ever blocked. Useight (talk) 04:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, is it under a different account or IP? The fact that you can post here means you are not blocked. –xenotalk 19:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Hot off the presses

Hey Xeno! Got a new issue of the WPNJ Newsletter dated tommorrow and ready to go. Can you get the delivery done for Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey/Newsletter/20100125 to everyone at Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey/Newsletter/Signup? Thanks! Jim Miller See me | Touch me 17:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done –xenotalk 14:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. On a related note, one of the stories in there pointed to a discussion about an article tagging bot for WPNJ. If we decide to go ahead, is there room in you work list to tag for us? Jim Miller See me | Touch me 14:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Yep, no problem. Just visit User:Xenobot/R and hit "Submit request" and fill out the form. –xenotalk 14:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: www.sikhiwiki.org (another wikipedia being used as a reference)

Hi fellow editor, I was wondering if you could help. I have noticed an alarmingtrend to use another wikipedia (www.sikhiwiki.org) as refrences to many articles based on Sikhism. Some of them are copied and pasted here. Does not using another wikipedia as a refernce to articles simply undermine the credibility of wikipedia here? I could go to www.sikhiwiki.org for example and create an article that "all sikhs must wear purple turbans" and simple create on here and use sikhiwiki as a reference. Is there anything that can be done about this? Thanks--Sikh-History 11:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Well just as a point-of-order "sikhiwiki.org" is not a "wikipedia", it is simply a wiki - though also structured as an encyclopedia. Wikipediae are run by the Wikimedia Foundation.
That being said, You are right to remove the links. Wikis, by their very nature, will never be acceptable as reliable sources. They may have sources themselves which should be referenced directly.
Also - in terms of copying and pasting from there - the material seems to be acceptable if the sources stand up. See http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Copyright_released . WP:Attribution should be provided. –xenotalk 13:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, it is a wiki, and you see my point that article x has the reference stating "sikhiwiki". I think the credibility of wikipedia will be damaged if this continues. Is there is anything we can do as a blanket solution? Thanks --Sikh-History 19:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
You could try to have the links blacklisted, but I'm not sure if it would qualify. –xenotalk 19:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick RfC request

As an uninvolved admin, could you review Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Wuhwuzdat#Motion_to_close and decide whether that is consensus to close the RfC? It has gone stale now anyhow, and there isn't much more to say. I asked Juliancolton if he agreed to close a while ago and he didn't reply, and eventually archived the thread, so I assume he has no objections either.

Sorry if your the wrong person to ask, but I noticed you edit the RfC list in the recent past, and couldn't really see any specific place to post this as it isn't really suitable for an AN or ANI thread. Thanks in advance, --Taelus (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I've given it a quick look and will think about it. I generally agree that an RFC whose subject is not around anymore can generally just be closed quietly with the hope that constructive criticism will be taken on board if they return. If a helpful talk page stalking admin wants to take a look and close it, I wouldn't complain. I'm not sure if I have time to review the case in detail. –xenotalk 00:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
It looks like this editor is still editing. I also remembered that I've dealt with them with respect to my bot's tagging where they stridently opposed its actions. While I don't think this compromises my impartiality, I'm lazy - so I'm going to leave this for another admin =) –xenotalk 14:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

About Chegg revamp proposed but asking your opinion first

Hi Xeno I have a proposed revamp of the Chegg article here. Generally the information checks out; it's growing rapidly, business success etc. But I removed much of the advertise-y material and tried to make it more neutral sounding, plus expanded info about competitors. If interested, please offer your comments, otherwise I'll probably substitute it in the Chegg article in a day or so.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Just giving it a brief glance, it's worlds better. I'd say make it live immediately. –xenotalk 16:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
OK thanx for your feedback. --Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Chicago tagging update

I have lost track of the last update, but now the stats bot is superpowered, so we should see what we can dig up for it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give it a shot in a short while. –xenotalk 00:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Blue Valentine

Thank you for taking care of that. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for noticing =) –xenotalk 16:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

CinErotic FilmFest

do you have access to the original post? I'd be happy to take a swing at re-writing it... Also, I've collected a bunch of external references (see below). But also, I would DEFINITELY appreciate it if you try to "userfy" it... (also, am I posting this message in the right place?) THANK YOU!!! - Kiki

citations:

http://www.festivalfocus.org/festival_view.php?uid=1582 http://twitter.com/festivalfocus

http://eventful.com/atlanta/events/film-cinerotic-festival-/E0-001-025187262-4

http://www.zvents.com/atlanta-ga/events/show/96473805-cinerotic-festival

http://www.pd.org/~eyedrum/calendar/index.php?eventTypeId=3&id=3243&month=2&year=2010

http://degeneratepress.livejournal.com/134609.html

http://andel.home.mindspring.com/film_love.htm

http://artlanta.blogspot.com/2010/01/film-love-2010-lecture-at-emory.html

http://gonzoriffic.livejournal.com/45172.html

https://www.withoutabox.com/01festival/01t_acc/01t_acc_edit.php?festival_id=8861 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiki ATL (talk • contribs) 19:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE: so I took a swing at re-writing it, can you tell me if you think it meets the requirements now? http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Kiki_ATL/CinErotic_FilmFest - Kiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiki ATL (talk • contribs) 19:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No. It is still not acceptable for the mainspace. Has there been any published news stories about this film fest? The article needs to be written in an enyclopedic tone. See, for example, Rainbow Film Festival. –xenotalk 19:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE2: Okay, I've tried to format it more encyclopedia style, taken out the more show-specific info, and I've classified the links. Currently there's no published news articles about it, as it's still 2 weeks before the first one takes place. There should be some in another week or so. What do you think? Also, I perused other film festival Wikipedia articles, and noticed that not all of them have external published sources (ex: Denver Underground Film Festival).--Kiki ATL (talk) 23:03, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

It's getting there but I'm afraid it probably doesn't meet the General notability guideline. You should format the bottom part into an "External links" section. –xenotalk 02:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE3: Ok, in reading over the Notability guidelines, it seems that a subject isn't considered Notable unless it's got independent reliable sources. However I note several Wikipedia articles about film festivals and arts festivals, that also do not have independent references... so I'm confused. Should I - 1) wait until I can cite an independent source besides a blog/listing/artsite, or 2) beef up the article with more explanation of why this festival is culturally significant (ie, more about how it's one of only a few erotic film festivals in the U.S., that some of the films being shown are rarely screened 32mm art films from the 1960s, etc?)--Kiki ATL (talk) 14:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes, but WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. You could nominate those articles for WP:AFD if you don't believe they meet the notability guideline. Ideally, yes, you should wait until there's a reliable source to cite. But if you did #2 and made a good assertion of notability, you might be able to scrape by - but someone might still nominate the article for deletion. –xenotalk 14:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you move?

Can you move the Get Down (Emmalyn's Song) to Get Down (Emmalyn Estrada Song)? Thanks! (OMGstrings (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC))

This is  Done. Quick question: did you really take that picture that you uploaded to Commons? I ask because there is no metadata on the file... –xenotalk 19:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Uh no ooops wrong copyright =] mind changing that? (71.22.170.68 (talk) 23:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)) it's just something i got from her myspace. (71.22.170.68 (talk) 23:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC))

I'll get it sorted. I'm trying to get a properly licensed picture from a flickr user. Thanks. –xenotalk 15:24, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

“Goat”

Thank you for the extended semi-protection of “Goat”. The article has been a persistent target of vandalism for as long as I have followed it. During past times that it has been semi-protected, anons have posted to the talk page to suggest or request edits, these edits have been seriously discussed, and often implemented. —SlamDiego←T 19:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Yes, it looked like it was taking up far too much editor time and some tomfoolery was not being noticed. Thanks keeping an eye on the talk page for such good faith suggestions. –xenotalk 19:51, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

PROD notice of Emmalyn Estrada

I've proposed this article for deletion. Twinkle refuses to notify you, so anyway here's my PROD:

Non-notable singer who does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. Absolutely zero news coverage except for one article listing her as a nominee in the "Dance/Urban/Rhythmic" category for a Canadian Radio Music Award, which, as the redlink shows, is not "a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award." No other evidence of notability.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 00:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I'm afraid the sources have yet to catch up with her notability. Deprodded. –xenotalk 16:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Note to self - now at AFD. –xenotalk 20:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Indiana Militia Corps

The Page, Indiana Militia Corps, was unfairly deleted. You commented on the undeletion log; thank you. However, I do not have much experience in handling undeletions. I already exhausted my options and it seems that two or three of the people who oversaw the deletion, including the fellow who became the page administrator, were working as a team. There was an organization to their actions beyond the wiki process that suggested off-site communication. The subject is a controversial one, especially in the last year. Their arguments for deletion applied far less to this article than to other articles on the subject of militia groups in the U.S., which I am an expert on. Articles such as Ranch Rescue, Minuteman Project, and possibly even Michigan Militia qualify better for deletion than this article, and their wikilawyering tactics in unison stonewalled me while the article moved forward for deletion.

I also work a long (12-hr) shift for 2-3 days a couple times a week, which prevents me from addressing matters in an immediate fashion during the times when I must work.

I am an inclusionist Wikipedian and I suggested several alternatives, such as merging the article into Constitutional militia movement or another similarly related article; or some other modification that would preclude the possibility of deletion. They would not consider my arguments, and proceeded to delete the page as fast as possible. The consensus was done with a minimum of participants, also people that I believe were invited in to vote on the subject because I checked their contrib logs and they had not made any edits to the article.

I plead with them to reconsider, to delay the vote for deletion, even to consider the fact that the deletion was not in the interests of Wikipedia (deleting did not improve WP, it only takes away from it). Finally I invoked WP:IAR and they told me in essence that deleting the article and rigidly applying their guideline as the basis for deletion was more important than upholding the pillars I was relying on for my argument. Last I checked, the spirit and purpose of the Five Pillars were substantially more important than a mere guideline. I haven't put the deleted page back up because I don't want to run into the 3-revert rule or an edit war; which I believe the fellow who led the charge for deletion would have used to keep me from permanently undoing the damage they did.

Your advice would be greatly appreciated; while I did not create the article, and certainly wouldn't put my own original research into the article, I am committed to improving articles in this subject due to my expert knowledge. I can't improve Wikipedia if the articles I'm working on get deleted, and I am beginning to think that certain people with differing views on the subject have done this to WP:GAME the subject. When POV language was rejected from the editing of the article over the last several years, the tactic changed to one of deletion using these wikilawyering tactics. This has left me incensed and almost to the point where I'm going to completely walk away from Wikipedia and NOT recommend it ever again. I would like to think that the processes established with the development of Wikipedia would insure fairness, the inclusion and expansion of content, and the neutrality that comes with leaving politics, etc. out of the editing process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JP419 (talk • contribs) 07:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I would advise against accusing participants of working in concert; some people just participate in AFDs by watching the daily log. Your main hurdle seems to be a lack of reliable sources to support the notability of this organization. As you can see from the above; this is something not even administrators can ignore. You could take the article as it stands to DRV to discuss the deletion discussion and it's outcome or you could improve the article with sources so G4 no longer applies. Best of luck. –xenotalk 16:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Help please

I wonder if you might be able to help with my request at Wikipedia:BOTREQ#Null edits? As no one responded yet, I thought about pinging my friendly local bot operator. Null edits do not add any entries to the history of the page, so I am hoping you can do this without seeking explicit approval :) Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and are you happy with my proposed auto inherit code on Template talk:WPBM? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately AWB no longer permits us to make null edits... Sorry. I could try with m:touch.py but I'm not sure that even works - it says it is deprecated. Will try and do this later and let you know.
Looks good. :) –xenotalk 17:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Inheriting needs a small adjustment

Check this one. I suspect is because WPBIO wasn't caught in the Preclean phase. We should expand it a bit to cover all redirects of WPBiography. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm... The code I wrote for you was intented to be run on net-new tags only. The WPBio is a bit of a strange beast as it is often split across multiple lines requiring me to use a single-line regex. Which can be greedy at time. I toyed around with the idea of using "In Template Call" or whatever - but that doesn't seem to function the way I thought it would. Any ideas? –xenotalk 13:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not running in only new tags. :P Usually I add parameters to already existing banners. I think we have to wait for Wikipedia:AWB/B#.22In_template_rule.22_bug to be fixed to use the in template rule. I think we can ask someone to make a regex for us or I can experiment a bit. We ll keep in contact. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
You could wrap the WPBiography with the different names (WPBiography|WPBio) etc? –xenotalk 14:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

London Metropolitan University

On your response at ARV to edits by contributions -- is it not an abuse to load up a page with what amounts to branding/advertising on behalf of the university? If not -- could you perhaps suggest a different recourse? thanks, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

That's not vandalism, though. Maybe try talking to them, or WP:COI/N, or WP:ANI. –xenotalk 19:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Looks like Caknuck (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) sussed out that they were actually adding copyvio material. S/he's going to f/up with them on that. Thanks for your diligence on this matter. –xenotalk 20:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

A recent FfD close

When you made these edits, why did/do you think "This image doesn't actually exist at commons under this exact file name as some have said below" was relevant as a closing to keep reason?--Rockfang (talk) 21:53, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Because one of the commentators (you actually!) !voted delete per WP:CSD#F8 but "all local references to the image [were not] updated to point to the title used at Commons". As a point of order, I didn't necessary close it as keep, I kind of just closed it without prejudice. –xenotalk 21:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
My apologies. Normally, when I suggest images can be deleted via F8, I don't edit usage links in case the F8 is denied. The deleting admin typically adjusts the links. Because of this, I forgot about the clause you quoted above. It also didn't click in my head that this image is used a bajillion times.--Rockfang (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
No problem at all. –xenotalk 22:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Claire Redfield

Hello! Please note that I have expanded the article considerably and so it is no longer a mere copy of the other wiki's article. Thank you. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 22:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I saw that. I'm thinking we need to delete the old copy vio revisions and make a new, properly attributed copy. –xenotalk 22:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
My main cocnern is that an article on this significant character not be prevented from existing due to some technicality, i.e. no one tries to say that we cannot have an article on her because they cite an AFD closed as speedy delete as a precedent judgment on the character. The character definitely is worthy of inclusion and the revised version does not keep much if anything from the pre-nominated version. I do think, though, that it probably should be merged to Claire Redfield, as the "(character)" is probably unnecessary. I do not see any talk page or AfD discussion supporting a redirect of that article, which was redirected, restored, redirected, etc., but without any apparent discussion. Anyway, thank you for keeping an open mind. By the way, concerning your userbox, what a bad deal that they cancelled Terminator The Sarah Connor Chronicles after just two seasons. I really thought that that well-made show did not have any kind of "conclusion"! I like Summer Glau's work as well and from Firefly to Terminator to Dollhouse, her shows just don't seem to last. WTH?! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 14:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Yea, that was a real shame. I heard that FOX threw TSCC under the bus in order to push Dollhouse. And we saw how that turned out! Poor Whedon. –xenotalk 14:33, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, and go figure, the final half of season two of Dollhouse was, for the most part, exceptional. The show just started to get much more exciting, although it did at least feel like something of a conclusion. The worst is when shows are cancelled and just end with no resolution. A huge let down was Rome, Deadwood, and Carnivale all having premature cancellations despite plans for continued stories. HBO is "good" for that! Best, --A NobodyMy talk 14:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Is this an issue?

I seem to have come across somewhat of a problematic account and I'm looking for advice on how to proceed. User:Kieranlavelle has only used Wikipedia to create articles for himself and his friends (all of which have been speedy deleted). His user page consists only of some strange call to arms for an XBox tournament of somesort, and his article contributions are limited, the last one consisting of this. What type of warning can be used in such cases? It's like a combination of NOTMYSPACE, vandalism and disruption....--Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd say something like a {{subst:uw-bv}} and report to AIV on the next offense. –xenotalk 15:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, I've added the suggested template. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Blargh29 Category lists

Sorry mate. I guess you're right that there ought to be permanent list of those cats. Also, sorry for jumping the gun deleting the WP:STEELERS list (I thought it was finished with the WP:PITTSBURGH task). Thanks again for the running this awesome bot. --Blargh29 (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Feel free to use a subpage of WP:CATS in future for these things - to keep your subspace clean. –xenotalk 15:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Baseball templates

Okay This will take awhile. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, take your time. –xenotalk 20:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Update I think I've got it. Also, I noticed this. You may want to look into it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that! Hm - that's a strange edit? I'll ask Mag what happened. I think it was because the article-space page is a redirect. –xenotalk 13:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

re:DC

If they had not blankened their usepages, I would be more inclined to AGF, but imho the actions taken by the account in the last few minutes are just too distinct to be the result of one mistake. If I am wrong, the better. Best Skäpperöd (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Indeed - thanks for bringing this to our attention. –xenotalk 20:53, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

wikicide

I googled it; the number one search results is on the Website Who Shall Not Be Named. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I know... lol. I was trying to dig up the old article from the nostalgia wiki but I don't have ze ops over there. –xenotalk 21:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Boys Like Girls

Hi Xeno can you do me a favor? Can you revert the last edit made by some IP who removed the entire and sourced "Musical style, and critical reception" section from the article on Boys Like Girls? I tried but can't. Thanks. Caden cool 00:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's the dif for the IP's edit [7]. Caden cool 03:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
checkY Sure. I simply edited the old revision, copied the section, and pasted it onto the current revision. –xenotalk 15:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

New Article/Deletion

This is just a quick favor... Could you delete the redirect Doodle4Google? I wrote an actual article that is about the specific competition (Official Site) and it is in my sandbox at User:IBen/Sandbox/Doodle4Google. I'm working on adding content and more refs. By now, you're probably asking why I need you delete the page. The thing is, I would like this article to count as one I created. I appreciate your input an await your response.--iBentalk/contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 00:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xenotalk 16:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Andy Summers

Hi again Xeno, - [8] - any suggestions? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can tell they've removed references, added unsourced statements, and also used PECULIAR FORMATTING? You should probably engage them at their talk page, in the meantime, I've reverted back to the Jan 8 version. –xenotalk 21:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
[9] ?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Your SMS message

No, I don't wish to discuss anything with you; it would very likely be unproductive in any event. What I do want though is for any future discussions about me to be held in a venue where I am allowed to participate, not on a hostile talk page. Roux can shout and scream as much as he likes about me on his own talk page, that's his prerogative as far as I'm concerned, but I draw the line at administrators joining in with the abuse. Your comments were patronising, misleading, and insulting, and I suggest that you consider very carefully the wisdom of continuing on that talk page in the same vein. --Malleus Fatuorum 17:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, looked into it. Looks like Malleus slinged a barb your way and you took him on. I've personally come to the conclusion that attempting to change or engage Malleus is a non-starter. Best to just ignore him and hope the treatment sends him back to article writing, where he is apparently a proven commodity.

— xenotalk 17:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
My comments (reproduced above for ease-of-reference) only discussed you so far as was necessary to get my point across to Roux. I apologize if you found them "patronising, misleading, and insulting" - I was simply stating matter-of-factly what I have come to believe to be the ideal response to your approach to dispute resolution.
I would welcome further clarification from you, or if you would simply like to let this drop, that's fine as well. Thank you for your advice - though I believe I am done commenting at that venue anyway. –xenotalk 17:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Let me put it to you as simply as I can. If you believe you can make a case that my contributions to this project are so inferior to your own that I should be side lined into what I had until now thought was the purpose of this project, writing articles, then I invite you start an ArbCom case to settle the issue. Because you know what? I'm fucking pissed off with this dishonesty. So let's have it out, in the open. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Quite the opposite. I think your article-space contributions are invaluable, and in that area you've done more than I ever will and I thank you for that. But I think that your - I'll just say "brusque" - method of interacting at times (especially in disputes or dispute resolution venues) does cause disruption. Whether this is your intention or not does not matter. My suggestion to Roux was to shrug this off, rather than attempt to fight fire with fire. If my choice of words caused you to be pissed off, then I again offer my apologies. –xenotalk 21:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I think you expressed yourself badly, and if I was one one the kids who go crying to Mama every time they get upset then I'd be dragging your sorry ass back to ANI. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I've never been that great at expressing myself. So amended [10]. –xenotalk 21:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind

I struck my name from your List o' Shame of Admins without a committed ID. I'm committed now. (Or maybe I should be!) -- Flyguy649 talk 22:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

hehe no problem! thanks for the note –xenotalk 00:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Filter 290

Hi Xeno. Based on your comments at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Soft blocking AOL I went ahead and put together a filter currently running in log-only mode to check for collateral damage. Any input on the matter would be most appreciated. Thanks! --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 16:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look, but I'm not so good with the filters. Thank you for taking the initiative on this. –xenotalk 16:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hi, Xeno. You're one of the few administrators I know in any capacity (from when you gave me the "Bug Squasher Award" several months ago and also from some help you gave us with archiving the IB Diploma Programme article's talk page) and I'm not sure to whom I should direct this question--on the one hand, it seems like a pretty trivial matter, but I would still like to know what I should do, if anything.

The editor Anythingspossibleforapossible was editing the Stargate SG-1 article this morning and I noted that s/he was incorrectly moving periods inside quotation marks 1 2 3 4 5 6 (like I said, it's a pretty trivial matter). Given that I don't think that the editor was deliberately trying to disrupt Wikipedia, I didn't want to treat him as a vandal and knew that using the rollback tool would be highly inappropriate. So I corrected the first two instances using "undo" and left a note on the editor's talk page, directing them to the appropriate part of WP:MOS. But there are some edits that remain to be fixed and I don't want to violate WP:3RR. I've read the 3RR guidance but, in the end, I'm not sure what I can/should do about the other edits.

I don't mean to make a mountain out of a mole-hill here and in the event that I'm foolishly wasting your time on something utterly stupid, I apologize. In any event, thanks in advance. Regards, • CinchBug • 16:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Never hesitate to ask if you're not sure about something =) Now, I'm more than a few years out uni, and I must admit my knowledge of our WP:MOS is slim at best -- but if a quote ends in a full stop, shouldn't the period come inside the quote mark?
As far as the 3RR question, you've only got 2 reverts so far and a violation is on the 4th revert. You're also not really edit warring right now, it's all good faith amongst the both of you so I don't think you need worry about that too much. –xenotalk 17:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Update to the above. Our MOS does agree that if a quoted portion ends in a period it should typically be inside the quote. HOWEVER - this editor seems to be moving periods inside quotes indiscriminately. So in one case he put it inside the quote where the sentence did not end ("essentially for young people") and in the same edit, he appropriated moved it inside the quote ("undoubtedly delight billions and billions.") [11] Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and this editor is mostly making changes contrary to the MOS. –xenotalk 17:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Yeah, I figured I could probably revert one more time before violating 3RR, but I didn't want to provoke anything, either. Regarding the edits, I'll need to look closely at them so that I don't accidentally undo something that turns out to be correct. I looked at the editor's contributions and it appears that he frequently makes these types of edits--hopefully he'll read the relevant bit at WP:MOS#Quotation marks and will apply it correctly in the future. Thanks again! Regards, • CinchBug • 17:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

needs-infobox article tagging

Just wanted to thank you again for the needs-infobox tagging. In response to your comments, I think you already noticed that I have requested project tagging from another bot (I wasn't aware yours could do both). I would be happy to help out with the Children's Television task force though - I don't know a lot about the subject area, but I'm always happy to learn and I could help getting the task force page set up (I just finished establishing the CHERUB task force at WikiProject Children's Literature). strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 18:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. See below. –xenotalk 21:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

As infoboxes are optional, please don't tag articles as needing infoboxes. This is a decision that is up to the editors, not a drive-by tagging. Thanks. Awadewit (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Seconded. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

List of video games exclusive to a seventh generation console

Thanks for the barnstar. I'm slowly expanding PS3, then PSP, then I'll work on Wii. 360 is also near completion. I loathe the day when it's the DS's turn...--WhereAmI (talk) 21:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Yea, the Wii and DS must be really tough because they're almost all exclusive! Lol. –xenotalk 21:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI

FYI. No action/reply necessary. Tan | 39 13:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Tan. Commented there. –xenotalk 13:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Red Sox again

Thanks As you can see, I made some progress, but I stopped a number of days ago. I'll get to it, slowly but surely. At the risk of sounding aggressive (which I am not trying to be at all), I figure that if they've had two tags for a year, a few more weeks won't really matter and after all two tags isn't really hurting the talk pages. But, yes, I still plan on fixing them up (and your list is slightly different than the one I have, so I suppose I will have to take a look at the discrepancies.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there's no rush. I think I must have misunderstood you when you said "I think I've got it." - I was under the impression that you were telling me you had completed it. My apologies =) –xenotalk 19:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

headache image

It says the image was from istock but I do not see it there. Are we sure this is not someone playing a trick on Wikipedia?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

See http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-503669-confused-overread-girl.php ... But for all we know they lifted it from the US Gov =) Will have to see if I can get a look at the deleted image description. –xenotalk 20:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I found a copy on this .gov site. [12] Looks like istock is hosting content without attribution? --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
How can we be sure they didn't license it from istock? I think your best bet, though, is to take it up with the commons admin who deleted it for further discussion. I'm not an admin over there. –xenotalk 20:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Does the US government do that? BTW I see a lot of images with this ADAM tag attached to them. [13] what is the copyright of these?--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I dunno what that ADAM is about... As to your question... See the very tag in the image you linked: "the NIH frequently uses commercial images which are not public domain. Email the source site if it is not clearly stated that this specific work is in the public domain". –xenotalk 20:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Facepalm

Thanks for finding a suitable image for this article rather than just removing the one I chose. Images are not my forte as yet; it slipped my mind that we have some non-free ones kicking about!--otherlleft 20:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I dunno, we might be able to write a fair use statement for The Picard. Maybe. –xenotalk 20:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
It would be a pretty sweet coup if we could! How's the backlog on patrolling images these days? It's not exactly as sexy BLP, so is it a land of neglected backlogs?--otherlleft 21:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I think maybe a fair use rationale of that memed image with the caption might fly. Worst that could happen is it go to FFD. –xenotalk 21:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

For protecting my user page. Any advice on how to deal with meat puppets? --5 albert square (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

In what regard? –xenotalk 21:47, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Well I did wonder if there was any way that we could report them like we report socks but I've since been told we can't. Is there anything I can do to discourage them from vandalising my talk page when it's unblocked? --5 albert square (talk) 22:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
If they're vandalizing it doesn't really matter if they're socks or meats, just report to WP:AIV after issuing the appropriate warnings. –xenotalk 22:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Noindex tag

I think you're right, by golly! Oh well. Bearian (talk) 00:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Hidden pages in relation to the decision a while back

You are invited to join the discussion at User_talk:IBen#Hidden. iBen 01:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Here we go again... This was discussed a while back at the AN.-- iBen 01:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree that secret pages aren't a very good use of time or Wikipedia resources. –xenotalk 13:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Just so it's understood, though...

...I was only reverting it because I thought I had to; no malice was intended. If it hadn't been archived, I wouldn't have even batted an eye. HalfShadow 20:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough... now you know - there are very few exceptions to WP:3RR. –xenotalk 21:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Team colors

I guess you saw my egg-on-face comments to KV5. I just mentioned to him about that red-link's activities reminding me of Hanlon's razor, the part that says, "whoever is stupid and industrious is a menace." The red-link was kind of industrious, methodically making his changes without talking to anyone. Luckily for both me and wikipedia, sometimes I'm stupid, but I'm not all that industrious. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

heh. I must admit I had an audible chuckle seeing the vand and its restoration =). –xenotalk 21:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
By the way, you didn't have to revert your comment to me suggesting I wasn't awake. You were pretty much on the money with that one, as I was half-asleep following some doctoring today. It's best to edit wikipedia when alert and sober. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
...but not as fun. =) –xenotalk 21:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Editing wikipedia is not about fun. It's serious stuff. I know that because I keeping getting told that. I'm reminded at this point of a baseball umpire, Ron Luciano, who talked in his book about the then-manager of the Baltimore Orioles, Earl Weaver. Luciano liked to have a little fun on the ballfield, calling runners out by "shooting" them and stuff like that. Weaver, who was a pain in the [neck] to most every umpire during his run as manager, accused Luciano of "not taking the game seriously." Luciano responded that Weaver "probably takes The Three Stooges seriously." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Bugs, I hereby dub thee King Of Analogies And Witty Anecdotes. –xenotalk 21:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
That reminds me of a story... well, I'll have to get back to you on that. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Question!

Just wondering if you could offer a bit of guidance on something. I just stumbled upon this. Now, "Other Life: Azure Dreams" is not the right name (pointed out right in the first paragraph), which is just "Azure Dreams", but that's already a Playstation game. I don't agree that this should be merged, but I'm not sure what the right format for the name would be. It should be "Azure Dreams (something)" but I don't know what the standard is. Thanks in advance for any help! Audiosmurf ♪/♫ 02:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

If merger is not ideal, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines#Disambiguation it looks to be "Azure Dreams (GameBoy Color)". –xenotalk 03:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh-ho! Thanks for the help, and the link! Audiosmurf ♪/♫ 03:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Anytime =) –xenotalk 03:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


Claire Redfield histmerge

Thanks for doing the Claire Redfield histmerge. Would you also merge in User:New Age Retro Hippie/Claire Redfield's history? User: A Nobody copied from there, creating an attribution dependency. It would be cleanest to put all the history into one page. As a bonus, there are no interleaved edits: the draft was edited solely between the redirection and the recreation. Flatscan (talk) 04:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done, cheers. –xenotalk 13:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Rebecca Chambers (character) needs similar histmerges, but there are some revisions that should stay in place (the dab at Rebecca Chambers) and others that could be deleted (attribution via dummy edit). Should I give you the details or list at WP:Cut and paste move repair holding pen? User:Anthony Appleyard has been very helpful when I've used there in the past. Flatscan (talk) 04:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Either way is fine with me. I can do it. –xenotalk 13:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Please see details at WT:Articles for deletion/Claire Redfield (Character)#Rebecca Chambers. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 05:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
This is  Done. Thanks =] –xenotalk 03:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. One problematic revision, a version of the full character article sans attribution, was left behind at Rebecca Chambers. Since it was immediately reverted, I think it's okay to delete that revision outright. WP:Revision deletion would be more resistant to accidental restoration, but I'm not sure if it's been opened to admins. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 04:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
This is  Fixed. Thanks for noticing it. –xenotalk 01:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Needs infobox tagging for WP:YA

Sorry, but the consensus is to revert the bot tagging and leave it up to individual editors. Could you please undo the tags? strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 10:54, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

 Doing... –xenotalk 01:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
This is  Done. 1,820 edits Cheers, –xenotalk 01:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

A question about rules of userboxes in Wiki

Hi dear adminstrator, I am a user in Persian Wiki and I have an on going discussion with a Persian adminstrator about the userboxes we can create or not in Wiki. The question is: Is making userboxes like: "This user supports independence of Tibet from China" or "This user supports independence of Azerbaijan from Iran" or "This user is against Hizbullah terorist group." illegal according to Wiki userbox rules or not? R these rules same in all Wikis or different from one Wiki to another? I'm waiting 4 ur answer a.s.a.p. Regards, Pournick (talk) 04:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The rules indeed differ, so I have no idea how it is on Persian wikipedia. On en.wiki it is generally agreed that their userboxes are meant to further collaboration. Divisive userboxes are typically frowned upon. See Wikipedia:Userbox#Content restrictions and Wikipedia:User page#What may I not have on my user page? for further information. –xenotalk 04:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Detagging

Just to point out a few edits like this and this where reverting your bot's Children's literature tagging also reverted your bot's WP:OXFORD tagging. No big deal; I've fixed a couple manually but the rest can probably wait until you're next asked to do a WP:OXFORD run. Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:46, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Hm I had hope there wouldn't be issues like this. Thanks for noticing - I found a few more. –xenotalk 14:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Strange

I added my comment without realizing that you had archived. I don't have any idea why it didn't EC me. I'll revert my response to Fut Per if you'd like. Scottaka UnitAnode 16:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

EC handler can be funny sometimes. I don't think it's a huge issue, you can leave it, or take it off. Either way, the heat needs to be lowered so I figured shutting it down was in everyone's best interests. Thank you for the note. –xenotalk 16:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Tremmaester

This user just signed as you. Just thought you might like to know. -FASTILY (TALK) 20:46, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw that. –xenotalk 20:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

A quite belated response

I fixed the problem with the RFA finder. If there's still a bug, poke me.

(And maybe you were right about me not logging on a lot... ) —Animum (talk) 02:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem! Time off is healthy. As you maybe guessed from the hibernating barnstar, I'm trying, unsuccessfully, to take a break. =) –xenotalk 02:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hotel stubs / rollback

Hi, or you could try kindly asking me not to do it or in the first place have kindly asked me to expand the articles and assume good faith. Frankly the attitude shown by people on her, most of whom I've contributed more to this site on the last half hour than they've done in months is not in the spirit of what wikipedia is about. I know you dislike the Blofeld stubs and I would rather they were all full length articles too but there is certainly no need threaten as you have done. When are people going to learn that we are supposed to be building this together? I dislike the way you see yourself as having authority to order editors about. You think you are above others? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 15:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

All I asked was for you to not use the default rollback summary when contesting prods, and to remain civil [14] - and you responded thusly [15] [16]. Sorry that I was direct and didn't prefix it with 'kindly'. There was no assumption of faith necessary, good or otherwise as it was just an advisement about policy/guidelines which need to be followed regardless of your intention. I don't have an opinion one way or the other about the hotel stubs. –xenotalk 15:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I still don't think it was necessary to "formally" warn me as you did. It came across as condescending and interfering even if you think you were right as an administrator to step in. Yes we should ideally remain civil but when somebody says something like " This looks to be Blofeld at his most time-wastingly annoying" it is not easy to be all sweet and lovely. A distinct lack of good faith. i have always tried to put my time to good use on here, more than most people and I also believe I waste much less time than most people who hang out an ANI and troll forums. You added fuel to the fire by warning me and it came across as ganging up on me and that you fully supported Iridiscent. I had stopped using rollback after only a few anyway, it was not as if I did the whole lot. I can't understand how you didn't realise this and that I knew it was the incorrect procedure. Anyway. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 15:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The rollback thing was really what I came there for - I had no way of knowing if the reason you stopped was because you realized it was inappropriate use, or you simply had something interrupt you.
Re: civility - I can understand why that would cause you to lash out. WP:CIV is a policy I rarely bother even trying to enforce; which is why I only 'advised' you. That being said, I really do think you take things too personally at times and as such respond in a combative manner. It is best to stay cool, but I suppose this is easier said than done. Best regards, –xenotalk 15:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, but any inflamed response is generally to some ignorant comment and a major failure to WP:Assume Good Faith. I strongly believe a large number of the incidents which occur on here would not take place if people seriously did this in the first place... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, but you know as well as I that fire isn't an effective way to fight fire. As to your second point, AGF used to be a policy. Not sure why it isn't any longer... –xenotalk 16:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Me neither. For me it is the root of a lot of unnecessary ill feeling on here... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

... if it was your talk page

"Would you be fine with me changing the heading further to "Lar being somewhat of a douche on his talk page"? (This is a hypothetical question designed to enhance your understanding of the underlying concern) –xenotalk 20:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)"

Sure. Within limits, subject to User:Mindspillage/userpages, it's "Your page, your rules." ++Lar: t/c 20:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. FWIW, I think you would do well to cease the practice - I think it adds heat (rather than light) to the discussions on your page. But as you say, it's your page so YMMV. –xenotalk 20:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
So you think that I shouldn't have changed "Are you going to shit, or get off the pot?" to "Hipocrite makes a request for action" then??? I'm not sure I agree but I'll take your advice into consideration... ++Lar: t/c 21:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
That one looks fine, I was more referring to ones similar to those that were brought up at the ANI thread ("neener neener" etc). If you're going to continue, at the very least you might think about doing something like putting ":Formerly (former section header here)" under the new header - to make it clear the header was not titled by the first poster. –xenotalk 21:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't put a lot of stock in A Nobody's opinions, I'm afraid. I may have to commission a poll on this! Most of the informal feedback I've gotten from my TPWs has been highly supportive of my section heading changes. Neener Neener was even called "a classic" by someone (in an uncitable offline conversation)... but I do think the idea of tagging what the former was so that text searches work better might be a good idea. ++Lar: t/c 21:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Don't forget the {{anchor|Old header}} so the former section links work. I dunno, I just think that maybe you think it's harmless fun, but the user who you described as striking out might not think so. Then again, they might not be so sensitive. As I said, mileage varies. –xenotalk 21:32, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

"Dear gods, why not?"

You may wish to review User talk:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft. It will quite quickly demonstrate why the RFC never will go live. Hipocrite (talk) 09:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

What am I looking at?...filibustering? RFCs should not take months to draft. A single neutrally worded paragraph can be the genesis of an RFC, the community will take it from there. It seems like those who are too close to outlines (be it for or against) are taking too long to agree on the question. –xenotalk 13:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
You are looking at procedural filibustering. I agree with your statements. Perhaps you should just take the current RFC and move it live. I'd do so, but I have an opinion. Hipocrite (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to think about this some more. I do believe I've opined in the past on them as well, but not strongly. –xenotalk 13:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

What redirects should be left alone and what can be changed?

Retitled from "?"

If I am fixing a real disambigutation, is there a problem if I also fix other links on that page at the same time? Also, is there a problem fixing episode linkes? What I mean is, do you have a problem with me changing something like [[Broken Bow (Enterprise episode)]] to [[Broken Bow (Star Trek: Enterprise)]] (many of the Star Trek episode articles were created before the current naming standard for Star Trek episodes was adopted). NES Wii (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

If you're already there, the Star Trek example looks fine.
Something to look out for that is generally unhelpful is where you're changing from a redirect to a #targeted link. So Mario Tennis to [[List of sports games in the Mario series#Mario Tennis|Mario Tennis]].
Basically if the redirect could one day become an article, it should really be left alone. So in one of the ones I saw you make, [[foster child]] should not be changed to [[foster care|foster child]].
Just remember that there is nothing inherently wrong with redirects. Though, if there was a link suchlike Barack obama, that should be fixed (and not by piping).
Please just think about why you are piping the link. If it is simply to avoid the redirect - then there is likely no reason to do so and it probably runs afoul of WP:R2D (like changing [[mobile emitter]] to [[Doctor (Star Trek)|mobile emitter]]) –xenotalk 17:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Politics, Religion and Her (song)

Could you please watch this? I don't want to see Wikibones (talk · contribs) trying to circumvent consensus again. He's going to give me the same old crap about how a single isn't an album, therefore a single article should NEVER NEVER NEVER be merged. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 13:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

By consensus I assume you mean the general consensus at WP:NSONGS? If he reverts back to the article version following the lapse of protection, you should put the proposed merge tag and develop a local consensus to merge it to the album. –xenotalk 13:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Same thing with High-Tech Redneck (song). He refuses to merge even though I've suggested that it's community consensus to do that, saying that my edits are "vandalism" and "restrictive." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Again, proceed with the {{merge}} discussion. That there is a general consensus does not necessarily mean it extends to the local issue. Neutrally notifying the participants of the past AFDs of the merger discussion would be appropriate. –xenotalk 16:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I initiated a discussion on both articles here and neutrally notified the most prominent country music editors. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't a note at WT:COUNTRYMUSIC have been better? Your note at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music) was decidedly less-than-neutral imo. –xenotalk 16:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Nobody's edited WT:COUNTRYMUSIC in a year or longer. Project's been tagged dead for more than two. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. Perhaps you could send the same neutral note to the participants at both AFDs? –xenotalk 17:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
The participants in the AFD were mostly just Caldorwards4, Eric444 and Nihonjoe, who closed it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Participants at Politics: [17] Redneck: [18] –xenotalk 17:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Done. Notified everyone. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Now the matter of how the articles should appear while the debate runs? –xenotalk 17:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
P.S. Want to temporarily lock High-Tech Redneck (song) to stop the editwar? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I think the best thing to do is to restore the article versions of the songs and add the {{merge}} tag so that people who come to the article naturally can comment. Otherwise it could be said that participants at the merge discussion were cherry picked from users sympathetic to your side of the debate. –xenotalk 16:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I think at the very least, a link to what each one looked like before redirection. I have added diffs showing what each article looked like after redirection. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
That won't help draw in people to the debate who visit the song articles. Are you ok with reverting to the non-redirected versions and adding the {{Merge}} while the debate runs? Otherwise I'm not sure it's a kosher debate as it would only be known to those that we canvassed to participate. –xenotalk 17:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay. Wouldn't hurt to lock them (Politics is already locked). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
On the contrary, protecting the pages might prevent good faith editors from trying to improve them in order to meet the NSONGS guideline. Since you've graciously agreed to let the articles stand while the merge proposal goes on, I don't think edit warring will be an issue so I also unprotected the Politics song. I will leave a note for Wikibones not to remove the tag until the discussion is complete. Thanks, –xenotalk 18:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
How long should this stay open? A few days? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I think similar to xFD debates it should run for at least 7 days or so, and if the discussion is still quite active after 7 days it should be allowed to run until activity dies down. –xenotalk 18:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

user page User:Wik4

why you deleted my user page? never requested, it seems like vandalism. explain it, please. greetings. Wik4 (talk) 12:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It was created by someone other than you, and you later blanked it; so I deleted it. I've just restored it, though. Cheers, –xenotalk 14:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Why does Wikicleaner fix redirects that are not broken?

English Wikipedia has a rule that one should not 'fix' redirects that are not broken (en:WP:R2D). However, this tool does just that - bypasses redirects and replaces them with piped direct links. Can this behaviour be disabled on the English Wikipedia? –xeno (talk) 24 février 2010 à 00:44 (CET)

Hi, I am not entirely sure I have to modify my tool. Fixing redirects is not done automatically by the tool, it's only a function available to the person using WikiCleaner : it's always a human decision, neither automatic. --NicoV (d) 24 février 2010 à 14:40 (CET) —Preceding undated comment added 13:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC).
Ok - thanks for letting me know. Is it disabled by default? –xenotalk 13:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
WikiCleaner doesn't do any modification to the article unless the person using it ask for it. See documentation : Fix Redirects in the Tool menu or either right clicking on a link an asking for fixing the redirect. So, fixing a redirect is a voluntary action by the user. There's a note on the documentation saying that some links shouldn't be repaired and to check WP:Redirect. --NicoV (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again for your assistance in helping me understand how the tool works. –xenotalk 15:14, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I've added a stricter warning [19]. Frankly I think you should consider not marking redirects as "orange" and lumping them in with other things that do potentially require fixing. The orange colouring seems to set off some primeval urge to fix harmless redirects. I had to recently block a user for their undesirable 'fixing'. –xenotalk 15:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for updating WikiCleaner documentation for the warning about replacing redirects.

I have thought about your suggestion of not displaying links to redirects in orange, and I'm not sure it's really useful. Let me explain. The analysis window contains several parts:

  • in the left part a list of links of interest. By default, this list doesn't contain redirects (only disambiguation pages).
  • in the right part the text of the page. When you select links in left part, they are highlighted in the text (red for dab, orange for redirects, ...). Since redirects are not listed by default, the user can't select them so they don't appear in orange.

So, to have redirects displayed in orange, the user has to change WikiCleaner settings so that redirects are listed.

Do you still think I should remove the orange highlight ? --NicoV (talk) 19:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest using some other colour than orange. Orange as a marker typically means "caution" or "need fixing" or whatever. Redirects aren't inherently problematic. Something neutral like purple maybe? –xenotalk 19:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
They will appear in cyan and italic in the next release. That should be ok. --NicoV (talk) 20:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
That's great - thank you for your attention to this matter. –xenotalk 20:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Template:iw-ref

Template:iw-ref seems to be at least mainly your work; could I ask you to take a look at my comments on Template talk:iw-ref and at least indicate (there) whether you agree or disagree? Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 19:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Replied there - thanks. –xenotalk 19:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

RfCs

Don't be a jerk re: Doc Glasgow's comments. He makes a valid point; removing it on the grounds that "he already commented" makes you look petty and juvenile. DS (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

See my comments at User talk:Scott MacDonald#RFC. –xenotalk 20:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Commercial republishing

Hi, further to our exchange at the Village Pump, I have created a proposed project page to address the questions raised. I've taken your concerns into account and kept the "consumer activism" to a minimum :-)

If you could comment at the pump, I'd appreciate it.-- RA (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Commented there - it looks fine - thanks. –xenotalk 13:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom on recently dead

Still going around with SpikeJones who has now given up on BLP and is trying to apply notability standards to article content (He's opened an RfC). But in the process of discussing with him I did find Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff/Proposed decision#BLP applies only to living people which may be what you were thinking of earlier in the discussion. The proposal didn't carry but it did have a little support. Gigs (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that. I was thinking more on the lines of other article-space examples that probably didn't go to arbcom. –xenotalk 13:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

RFA

When you get the time, would you be willing to evaluate me to see if I am ready to run? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

It would probably be a toss up. Have you seen User:Balloonman/How to pass an RfA? Take note of that, especially "How to prepare..." #10. –xenotalk 15:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm, I probably should pay more attention to that one, and I admit that that is a bit of a liability. I actually read that page a long time ago, and I feel like I fit everything, except for 10. I also ran into the cheatsheat recently as well. I could go ask Julian for a third opinion on this, and if he says no, I will drop it. Obviously asking everyone else would appear like canvassing, so that's a good reason for stopping. When you mentioned the tossup, what was the range that you were thinking of? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
I think you'll probably have a decent showing, but I haven't really been following RFA that closely so I'm not really sure. I have seen you trip over yourself in your exuberance over the last little while - but nothing I can put my finger on right now. –xenotalk 19:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I will admit that I have done that quite a few times. I'll go over to Julian to get his input as I have seen him around a bit more. Thanks for the response though. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

StarCraft II semi-protection

You unprotecting the article = I can potentially log out and go vandalize it right about now. What was the point? It is a very controversial subject as long as the release didn't occur yet. Shadiac (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A good faith request was made on the talk page from a non-autoconfirmed user. See also the Wikipedia:Protection policy, as I commented at your talk page. If vandalism resumes and is disruptive to the ongoing maintenance of the article, I have no issues putting it back. –xenotalk 18:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
[20] The irony. It drips! –xenotalk 20:58, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Star Trek Online

I continually have to remove the "massive" reference in Star Trek Online because the game does not meet the definition of an MMORPG. Star Trek Online is in the same realm as Guild Wars due to the instancing, and you will notice that Guild Wars is also not called a "massively" multiplayed online game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.101.175 (talk) 21:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a source to support this assertion? I note that Guild Wars is in Category:Massively multiplayer online games. IGN called it an MMO [21], as does the publisher [22], and the developer [23]. We go by what the sources say, not what we personally believe. However, if you have a reliable source that discusses this, I think it would be a good addition to the article. Gamespot touched on it [24] but didn't go so far as to revoke it's "massively" status due to the instancing. –xenotalk 21:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Please continue this at Talk:Star Trek Online#"Massively" so we can get other opinions as well. –xenotalk 21:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Having been unable to produce independent sources sufficiently debunking the "massively" claim, I will stand down on the current debate. If more discussion on this topic becomes available I will add it to the Star Trek Online discussion page. -24.14.101.175

Thanks - best regards. –xenotalk 22:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Cbsite

I have unblocked Cbsite (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) based on his request on unblock-en-l. I will counsel him regarding only uploading images with a good license. Fred Talk 14:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No problems here. I restored the user talk page history. I don't even remember placing this block fwiw =) –xenotalk 14:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


A request

Please speedy all images by this person. There is a few in the commons too I believe. i've actually been in contact with the subject of the article and she claims the article was a copyvio from a magazine about her and that the photos were scanned. Nuke em asap please. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 22:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Can't help with the commons images, but per WP:CSD#F9, "A URL or other indication of where the image originated should be mentioned." What magazine? In the interim, perhaps remove the images from the article and list at WP:PUF. Best, –xenotalk 22:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Magazine. Offline source. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 22:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I dunno; the remaining ones don't look like scans. List at PUF I think. –xenotalk 22:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I find it funny that there is a huge copyright paranoia on this site and will to delete images immediately yet when we know they are violations nobody could give a monkeys. Suppose this Brookshire woman made a complaint about personal images of herself being uploaded...

I've emailed you the email asking to remove the images specifically. I can't believe there is always this huge BLP paranoia and copyright fussing that goes on on here but when somebody officially demands that copyrighted image they own to be deleted you are unwilling to do anything about it. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 12:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

What part of "All user-created images must be released under a free license. For purposes of Wikipedia, "free" does not merely mean that you don't charge for it, but it means that you allow everyone to use, alter, and redistribute your work for any purpose. This release is not revocable." isn't clear? Dougweller (talk) 13:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I've just closed the afd as delete. Since the images are now orphaned and the licensing is dubious at best (no metadata makes it unlikely the user took them themselves), I've deleted them as well. –xenotalk 13:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree with that, the licensing was more than dubious, just making the point that if the licensing was legitimate, it's not revocable although of course we can still delete (but if someone else then uploaded it, wouldn't that be ok? - not for these of course). Dougweller (talk) 14:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
I think Himalayan's argument was that the user did not own the image in the first place, so had no right to upload it under a free license. –xenotalk 14:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Cheers Xeno... OK I'll finally get those expanded this afternoon. Grrr.... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 15:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, apologies. Dougweller (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Doug I contacted this woman and received an email from this woman telling me that the images are copyrighted and owned by her and that she did not want information about her or photos of her live on wikipedia.That is why I felt the images and article should be swiftly deleted as the claims were false as the uploaded did not own the images in proof!! Xeno I've completed those Italian films... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I misunderstood who was claiming what, I'd have deleted myself if I hadn't been stupid. I'm having a bad day in RL and it shows :-) Dougweller (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!! Sorry it took a while but I have a lot to do!!! All the best!!!

No worries Doug, the important thing is that the violating content is now deleted... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

BN

Ta! Pedro :  Chat  20:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Had me confused for a minute there. –xenotalk 20:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Confusion was more than one browser window for me! How sad is that! Pedro :  Chat  20:49, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
heh. –xenotalk 20:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Politics, religion, etc. etc.

It's been six days now and the consensus couldn't possibly be clearer that both articles should be redirected. Should this discussion be closed now, and the articles redirected? (And maybe locked too, since they were editwarred in the past.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

A solid consensus. Looks like another admin took care of it. –xenotalk 00:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

WP Eurovision newsletter

Hello again,

May I request that your bot distribute WP Eurovision's latest newsletter at Wikipedia:WikiProject Eurovision/Newsletters/January and February 2010 to everyone on this list. Many thanks in advance. Camaron · Christopher · talk 13:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 Doing... You know, you might consider culling the list of inactive editors... Some of these people's talk pages are completely dead except for past issues of this newsletter piling up =) –xenotalk 14:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 Done –xenotalk 14:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I will look at dealing with inactive members for next time round. Camaron · Christopher · talk 14:44, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Quick question

IP editor 123.200.247.139 (talk · contribs) has been adding the category "Australian Muslims" to a very long list of BLP articles, regardless as to whether the article has references to back up the categorization. All of the categories were added today within a minute or two of each other. Would the proper follow-up be to ask the editor to remove the categories themselves and only add them to articles where the Muslim categorization is explicitely sourced? Or should I remove all of the unsupported ones with a pointer towards WP:BLP and WP:RS? Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hm... I would probably first ask them where they got the list of individuals to tag and if it is a reliable source then to appropriately source it in the article-proper. If no response, then yes, undoing the edits with an appropriate edit summary would be the next step. Some of the articles do tag the "Muslim" with a reference. –xenotalk 15:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Exactly, the cats don't appear to be added in bad faith at all, they just need to be backed up in the article space. I don't usually deal with categories, or accounts who's only edits are to add the same categories to a large pool of articles, so I just wanted to make sure I was on the right path. Thanks for the help (again)! --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

User page addition

Hi, quick courtesy note.

The userspace proposal seems to have got quite strong consensus so I've gone ahead and added it back in. As Whitehorse1 had concerns, and you preferred a different wording, I've summarized the issue at WT:UP#Addition + discussion of any refinement needed if you want to suggest any improvements.

Best,

FT2 (Talk | email) 03:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've replied there. –xenotalk 14:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO tagging

It has been over 5 weeks since the last run. An update would be appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

 Task running..., see User talk:Xenobot Mk V/requests#WP:CHICAGO. –xenotalk 15:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
This is  Done, cheers. –xenotalk 16:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:UP redraft

Following discussion I've had a go at redrafting WP:UP which needed a good cleanup. I was amazed how much improvement is possible. Before proposing it at WP:UP I wonder if you'd like to review the cleaned up version and let me know any comments on its talk page.

I've deliberately made few or no substantive changes to allow focus on style and flow improvement.

I'll also be suggesting a rename to "Wikipedia:User pages", removing the ambiguity that "user page" normally means just the one main user page.

Thoughts welcome.

FT2 (Talk | email) 22:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks good, a diff would be nice.--mono (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Just at a quick glance - Looks good to me! Just make sure if any headers changed to {{anchor}} the old header. –xenotalk 23:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Done - thanks :) FT2 (Talk | email) 02:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Proposed. FT2 (Talk | email) 11:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Message Delivery

Hey Xeno! I had a quick request for you(r bot): Would it be possible to deliver Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Percy Jackson Task Force/Courtesy Notices to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Percy Jackson Task Force/Members every so often when you were alerted? Thank you on behalf of the project--mono (talk) 23:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, just let me know whenever you need something sent. –xenotalk 23:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Bot tagging

Would you be willing to assess all the articles in this category as all the other assessment bots are down? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you ensure that there is consensus for this task by seeking opinion at the project's talk page? After that, submit a affirm the request at User:Xenobot/R#WP:MASS (you can skip the first step since it's just auto-assessment being requested). Thanks, –xenotalk 02:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

KUTGW

Hey Xeno, I'm not sure what this monstrosity on your usertalk page is about (have you fainted? fallen asleep?), but I wanted to drop by and let you know that I've observed a consistent pattern of reasonable and considerate comments from you in various discussions. It seems that you're doing a fine job as an administrator. Please be careful about not going too far in throwing off the curve. :) Cheerios. 19:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The sleeping barnstar that appears when my talk page is empty is my reminder that I'm trying—rather unsuccessfully, mind you—to spend less time here (for various reasons both on-wiki and off). Thank you for your warm comment - that my presence here is perhaps making some kind of positive impact is encouraging. =) –xenotalk 19:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Juan Martín

ANy idea what we should do about this. Somebody insists on adding the part at the beginning. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 21:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

It should be removed, the user warned, and cautioned to add only encyclopedic facts supported by reliable sources, and to seek dispute resolution if their legitimate edits are seemingly being removed by someone with an apparent conflict of interests. –xenotalk 21:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for the sterling bot tagging on behalf of Wikiproject Venezuela. There must be a lot of work involved in creating/running a bot like this, and it is very useful and highly appreciated. Many thanks! regards, Rd232 talk 11:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem... =) It's been a while since I got to do a category key - so far only VEN and Indiana have tried it. –xenotalk 13:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Inactive admin email

Could you run a opt-out query against the expanded opt-out criteria people asked for? (I suspect the list won't change, but just to make sure). {{bots|optout=email}}, {{bots|deny=InactivityEmailBot}}, {{nobots}} Gigs (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, no bot has ever emailed before; so I doubt anyone would be using "bots|optout=email". Moreoever, no one would be using bots|deny=InactivityEmailBot as it is a brand new bot. Even if they did deny InactivityEmailBot ... by virtue of them making that edit they probably wouldn't be in the net for the email... –xenotalk 15:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm just trying to satisfy Josh Parris. So what's the next step? How do I get the bot flag on that account? Gigs (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Commented there. –xenotalk 15:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Tom's Gear

How is that wrong? They are the same thing, it would be like changing [[Tampa Bay Devil Rays]] to [[Tampa Bay Rays|Tampa Bay Devil Rays]]. Fixing links is not wrong (talk) 15:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Tom's Games is a separate website from Tom's Hardware. Perhaps one day it will have its own article. You also fixed Metal Sonic to a piped hashed link. You've been warned. I will assume good faith in that you were preparing this edit before you saw my message, but the next time you fail to adhere to the WP:R2D guideline, you will be blocked. –xenotalk 15:06, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I think blocking may be a little harsh, how many times he done it? Maybe if after ten or so warnings something may happen but blocking? Maybe it's the lack of other options for 'disipline' (I don't knwo what I'td be called, or infact whether you really can abbreviate it would) and I'm guessing he would never be indefinately blocked for doing it over and over and over and over ect. Would he? (so many questions) 'The Ninjalemming' 20:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
See their talk page, they've been asked by numerous folks to stop, and even agreed to do so at my talk page but then continued anyway. An indefinite block would come after several blocks of increasing length, but I hope that is not necessary. –xenotalk 20:15, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
So do I, is there any other way of getting people to do it properly that doesn't include warnings, blockings and seemingly inhumanly placed electricuting devices? 'The Ninjalemming' 20:18, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Help...again

I previously asked you for advice here regarding an editor who was adding the category "Australian Muslim" to a large amount of articles. I went through the articles one by one and read them all, removing the category from the pages where there was no reference content to support the category. It was tedious. I also left a talk page messge for the IP explaining why I was doing so. Today the user appears to have returned, this time as User:121.91.194.42 and has restored the category to some of the pages (w/o adding a source) and has tagged 116 articles with various descent categories based on the person's surname. Very few of these are referenced....Do I really need to read through each article again to ensure that the category is sourced? Or can the edits be rolled back and the user advised to only restore them to articles supported by sourced content? Adding the descent categories are the author's only edits and were all done within a couple of hours. Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 15:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Give them a sterner message about sourcing being required for such things and use the below script to change the rollback summary to something more descriptive and then you can use rollback to revert the edits. –xenotalk 15:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
importScript('User:Mr.Z-man/rollbackSummary.js'); // allows tweaking of rollback edit summary
I'm hesitant to use a mass rollback - I think I'll just 'undo' them all individually. I just wanted to make sure it was ok not to have to read through each and every article in order to remove the category. I'll reiterate to the IP that they can restore the category to any article that meets WP:BLPCAT. Thanks for you help again - I'll pick on someone else next time :) Cheers, Jezebel'sPonyoshhh 16:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
No worries... –xenotalk 16:06, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

A belated thank-you

... for doing the job listed in this bot-request last month.

I don't follow WP:BOTREQ closely, and forgot to monitor progress of the request. Your bot helped resolve a problem which would otherwise have remained messily unfixed. Thank you! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem - happy to help. Cheers, –xenotalk 16:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Stubs

Yes, the more I've thought about it, the more compelling arguements I have for not doing it! I'll revert this - it was more an experiment to see how good/bad the categories were being used. I'm going to do an all-encompasing bot-request for the film genres. Lugnuts (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

If someone doesn't pick it up in a week, ping me and I will file a BRFA for it. The main issue I see is that sometimes the stub templates used aren't exact accurate. For example 52 Pick-Up is listed as an "action-thriller" but it uses the drama-stub template. So we would be adding "1980s drama films" when the article says its an action-thriller... Food for thought. –xenotalk 18:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Cheers! Ahhh, human error. Where's HAL9000 when you need him? Lugnuts (talk) 18:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

G7

Why isn't G7 applicable on Owen Toon? Who has added substantial content to the article besides myself? -Atmoz (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you're right, you were the only substantial contributor. But another admin already declined the G7 so it would be wheel warring to fulfill it at this point. Please take it up with DGG (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). –xenotalk 19:58, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
So some admin comes along with his own agenda, wrongfully declines my speedy request, so then I can't have an article I wrote deleted? What bullshit. -Atmoz (talk) 20:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Suggest keeping this at ANI, because I'm getting confused. :-) -Atmoz (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Sure. –xenotalk 20:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Article issue

I have previously PRODed Mohammad Amin Valian and the creating editor has removed it on the grounds that he might get famous. I'm not going to touch it now, but I was wondering what your opinion was on this guy, as he isn't all that notable. I don't want to do anything right now as I want to see how you proceed on it. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Once an article is deprodded your only option would be to take it to AFD. –xenotalk 23:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Corey Haim: Section Death/UTC time.

UTC time used on Death of Michael Jackson:

"A Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) spokesperson said the 911 call came in at 12:21:04 p.m. (19:21:04 UTC). Paramedics reached Jackson at 12:26 p.m. and found that he was not breathing"

-- Kei_Jo (Talk to me baby! :þ) 01:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. –xenotalk 13:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

PJTF Delivery

checkYIt's ready!--mono (talk) 00:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

deliveries to User talk:Example

In reference to Xenobot delibering a newsletter to the user name "Example". The user Example is listed as an example here, it seems that the bot has decided that the example user is a valid recipient of the newsletter. I think that the simpler solution would be adding this to the bot:

if ( user_name != "Example" ) { 

 deliver_stuff();

}

or maybe:

if ( user_name == "Example" ) { 

 this.scold("Bad bot! Don't deliver!");

}

Please consider programming your bot to avoid delivering anything to the user called "Example", so people can keep using it as an example in lists. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

LOL ! This is simpler. Thank you for the note. –xenotalk 16:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Xenobot Incorrect Delivery

Xenobot left me a "Percy Jackson Task Force Dispatch" message but I'm not a project member. I'd guess the bot incorrectly picked my name up from the main page where my name is listed as contact info for another bot. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Yes, as with the User:Example above, I was very lazy and sloppy when generating the list of users to deliver this to (so sloppy, in fact that I didn't realize there was a separate subpage for members which would have avoided these errors). Won't happen again. Cheers, –xenotalk 22:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

-Atmoz (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. If this is your "swan song", I must admit I'm not surprised. Even as someone who is considered by some to be a process-wonk, I'm thoroughly unimpressed with the dogmatic adherence of some editors to the letter of the laws here shown at that ANI and your talk page, while almost totally ignoring the spirit. Best regards, –xenotalk 18:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Had to look up Swan song. Wasn't planned that way, no. But perhaps it is. -Atmoz (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Looks like WMC wanted that page after all. Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Best regards, –xenotalk 19:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

About a comment I made at Village pump (technical)

I added a comment in the secsion you opened about {{Imagemap}}. You can find it here. No one commented on what I said. So the question is was my comment the result of a paranoid disillusion or do you think there is any reason to be concerned about the kind of links I described. Thanks. –droll [chat] 05:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a potential problem that hasn't really presented itself yet (afaik), but it's something you might consider filing a bugzilla: on. –xenotalk 13:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Most Kind

[25] Thank you! Pedro :  Chat  21:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. –xenotalk 21:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Question regarding Xenobot Mk V's operation

I'm not quite clear on how Xenobot Mk V works. Does it perform a single run through the specified categories only, or does it also monitor later additions? --Paul_012 (talk) 17:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Single run, with additional runs on request. –xenotalk 17:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the info. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Rogue Editor

Hello Xeno,i am having a bit of a problem with User talk:ItsAlwaysLupus,i had notified him a while back about a unsourced statement(During the late 1980s, house music followed and replaced post-disco in the music scene on this article Post-Disco) and i removed it under WP:PROVEIT and he keeps restoring it without a source and trying to bait me into an edit war,i mean he really shows no want to resolve this problem,he is even stalking my edits and reverting my edits i have made at other random articles like here [[26]] and on his reverts on the post disco page he keeps calling me a vandal and such, i did a couple of reverts of his past edits just as a shot off the bow,that we can both do that but it is not going to get us no where,i have left warnings but he just puts them right back on my page,so before this escalates any further i suggest a ADMIN steps in at any capacity on neutral ground to clarify policy--Wikiscribe (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps leave it as "{{cn}}" for a month or two and if it's not cited by then, remove it. Following eachother to unrelated articles and reverting for no reason is not on... If that continues, perhaps an ANI thread or Mediation may be worthwhile. –xenotalk 18:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The unsourced statement has been their for about a couple of weeks already though io did remove it but agin he keeps restoring un sourced material,i will leave it for another 4 weeks,but after that the burden lies with the editor who adds statements not on the person that removes them to WP:PROVEIT,there is not much ambiguity there,would you not agree??? If he continues to troll my edits, i will troll his,i got no times for the red tape of the message boards,though i am on record here telling you about the issue in which you are an administrator--Wikiscribe (talk) 18:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, give it some time for the user to source it.
The correct way to respond to WP:HOUND is by reporting it, not engaging in it in turn. –xenotalk 18:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


As i said i just reported it to you ,that it is going on,you are an administrator. He has not found a source in the last couple of weeks so he probably never will,but i will give it another 4 weeks to find one,if not WP:PROVEIT--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:14, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, if it continues let me know. –xenotalk 19:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

OK i will,also maybe you might want to tell him/Her that leaving a citation is needed thingy next to the statement is not a license to have un sourced material indefinitely,which by his edit sums he thinks that is the case,i would but i don't think that will help matters much--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Some help please?

Hi Xeno, I believe that some recent vandalism was removed from my talk page history few minutes ago. Could you please tell me, if there's a way to put it back for an hour or so in my user space somewhere. I'd like to check on something. If you could do it please retrieve only 20 latest messages from my talk page history. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The last time something was removed from your talk page history was Feb 28. –xenotalk 23:00, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
That thing was oversited, right now it looks like something was just deleted by an admin. Should be in deleted contributions I guess. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
That log would've shown any admin deletion - if it had occurred. –xenotalk 23:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Strange! Thank you anyway.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:09, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
I understood what happened. I am very, very sorry I bothered you. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Never a bother and no need to apologize. Cheers, –xenotalk 01:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Bot Policy from ANI Thread

Josh Paris just edited the automated section earlier today to rephrase the Automated Scripts section to require a BRFA for massive article creation. What I was saying in the ANI thread is as long as he was approving each edit (i.e. hitting a key on the keyboard for each edit) instead of having it on full auto it's technically a user script not a bot and as such didn't require a BRFA as the policy was written (though this is definitely gaming the system in my opinion). If all you have to do is hit a key, say spacebar, for each edit you could easily exceed 10 edits per minute. Since it takes less than a second to hit a key you could theoretically get to over 1 edit per second. That's probably a violation of WP:GAME, but not really a violation of WP:BOTPOL (at least as it's written). The reason I brought this up was because I think rewording that section would probably be a good idea, though I guess that's kind of a {{sofixit}} thing.

From the Bot Policy:

Contributors intending to make a large number of assisted edits are advised to first ensure that there is a clear consensus that such edits are desired.

--nn123645 (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what prompted that; but it's a bit different - the user in question wasn't creating pages. I don't think we've had an issue with mass article creation in some time. –xenotalk 22:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Archive The Discussion?

Could you please archive this? Thanks... Doc9871 (talk) 01:06, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xenotalk 01:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Mercy buckets! :> Doc9871 (talk) 01:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
nb: This request did serve to cut-off my reply and give Doc the last word. Too much dispute prolongation/not enough dispute resolution. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 01:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Please take any further issue you feel you may have with me to my talk page; not on Xeno's or the AN talk thread; that's all this is about. I've never encountered you before today that I know of, but I don't need to have any "last word" anywhere, really. Cheers... Doc9871 (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I did, and without first seeing this. (Hi, Xeno, sorry for the orange bars;). Sincerely, Jack Merridew 01:27, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Before the paint dries, I'd like to suggest the thread be folded back into WP:AN in a collapse box so that it all archives together. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. –xenotalk 03:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

User question

Do the contributions of User:DimaG look suspicious to you? It looks like a bad-hand account to me, but I don't want to go any further without consultation. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to be more specific. Looks like all they do is nominate stuff for deletion, but that's not necessarily "bad hand". –xenotalk 03:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm thinking of this as a bad hand one because Dalejenkins originally had two accounts like this. I know that this is likely not him as it has been her a lot longer than the most recent SP/I. I'm just concerned that there might be a user who is doing virtually the same thing. It's probably nothing to be worried about though like you say. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I don't think a checkuser would take a look with this, unless something more concrete can be provided. –xenotalk 04:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the Barnstar, Xeno! Burpelson AFB (talk) 02:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

=) –xenotalk 02:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Processing of only unassessed pages while still performing auto importance

Is it possible to process only Category:Unassessed California articles, while still assigning autoimportance using Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Assessment/Categories? I'm just trying to clear the unassessed category at the moment, and with 24K pages within the scope I'm not dying to tag more. I started a discussion here for the consensus, and will have the project tag updated for the autoimportance, but wanted to make sure. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

This will be no problem. Just let me know when to roll. –xenotalk 02:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Just as an FYI the bot would operate on 535 of the 1744 articles with default logic. (Haven't calculated how many will set importance, as your key may change) –xenotalk 03:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Innocent attempt to list my company!

Hi Xeno - I tried to list a company called Powwownow, but it was deleted for not being notable. Can you send me a copy so I can re-submit when I have found some more references that will, I hope, provide evidence of its notability. It will save redoing all the coding work I did yesterday. Thank you in advance, John. Basebot (talk) 11:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

See User:Basebot/Powwownow. Please don't move it back into the mainspace until it satisfies WP:CORP. Best regards, –xenotalk 11:53, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basebot (talk • contribs) 13:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem... –xenotalk 13:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Mk V request

I see we are both online and that 72 hours notice is up. Could you take a look at User talk:Xenobot Mk V/requests#WP:CHESS. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. Thanks for the note. –xenotalk 15:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Looks like your project is already fairly well-covered. Only 29 new articles. If you expand the category list, I can run again. Cheers, –xenotalk 15:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Will look at that expanding categories, although it was quite expanded already. Is the results list available in any formatted way? Rather then this? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Add more cats

Just added another 98 categories(here). Would be happy if you run again with same settings. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Do these look ok as well? –xenotalk 17:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, great. Looks good to run again. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Only a handful more... Left a listified report at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess/Assessment#Report of recent tagging run by Xenobot Mk V... –xenotalk 17:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Great, thank you! Will maybe attempt another run with Wikiproject-Songs in a few days, but first I will start to get these 47 articles cleaned up. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Newsletter

Ready at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Percy Jackson Task Force/Newsletter/3172010.

Thanks, --mono 00:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done, but might I suggest not delivering so often. Might make people start to ignore the messages. –xenotalk 01:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Redirect bot request

Hey man, I saw the message you put on User:Emijrp's talk page about my bot request. Just out of interest, why do you not think it is a good idea to have redirects from hyphens to endashes? If someone types in 1892-93 Football League, they won't be able to get to 1892–93 Football League without a redirect, so it seems like a good idea to me. – PeeJay 12:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Are people in the habit of typing that into the search box? The immediate task may be a ok, what I'm more concerned about is that the bot may expand its scope to start creating countless redirects to titles with en-dashes (as it was previously creating countless redirects to mixed case titles). –xenotalk 12:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I would say that they are more likely to type "1892-93 Football League" than they are to type "1892–93 Football League", since there is no "–" key on a standard English keyboard. – PeeJay 15:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
More along the lines of: are people in the habit of reaching these articles by typing their names into the search box (i.e. do I wake up one day and say,, hey I want to read about the 1941-42 football league! or do I just happen to get their thru internal wikilinks). Maybe I'm wrong - so maybe these are a good idea. Personally, I think the pedantic adherence to MOS in using this silly endash that doesn't appear on a keyboard was a mistake in the first place. –xenotalk 15:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

COI

Would it be a conflict of interest if I was to close this AFD? It seems clear that it will be kept, and I am willing to close it, but since I wrote both the article and voted, I am hesitant to do so. If I cannot close it, would you be willing to do this for me? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it would be inappropriate for you to close it. –xenotalk 18:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
It looks to be headed for a keep verdict; but I think the crystalline water ice precipitation has not started falling yet, so I don't see the harm in leaving it open. –xenotalk 18:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


re WP:NEWSECTION
Thanks. Old habits never die I guess, although I am getting better at it. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


Second question. In the event that the nominator of the article for deletion is found to be a sockpuppet of a banned user, am I allowed to close the AFD as keep because the user was a sockpuppet? I know we had some closures after Dale was originally blocked, but I can't remember if we closed them all. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily... Can you give me an example? –xenotalk 14:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Here, here, and here. Tim Song closed them all, so I was just going to follow his lead. Of course, he wasn't involved in them as well. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
If you participated I would say to avoid closing it. If it's a snow result and the nominator is blocked as a sockpuppet then ok, maybe IAR to close it. But if there's delete votes and the like, it can usually be left to run. Sometimes someone will stand-in as nom if they generally agree generally it, irrespective of its provenance. –xenotalk 15:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Credo Reference offer

Hi Xeno. I don't know what sources you have to hand but you might find this offer useful. - Pointillist (talk) 22:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I noticed that, but I thought I'd better leave it to folks who actually do a lot of substantive article work. I'm more of a gnome myself... Cheers, –xenotalk 22:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Atmoz/Eyewall replacement cycle

Any chance of moving this to Eyewall replacement cycle with the reason being "shits and giggles"? Or deleting the redirect at Eyewall replacement cycle and letting me do it. -Atmoz (talk) 23:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done. Cheers, –xenotalk 00:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC) Oops. Just re-reading this I didn't read this properly the first time and I didn't use your desired edit summary. =\
You're no fun. :-p -Atmoz (talk) 02:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I honestly didn't read it properly or I would've done it. =] –xenotalk 13:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects#Subcategories

Suggestions and thoughts? Thank you.

I have ascertained that you have the best and most developed bot for tagging wikiprojects. Okip 04:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I think Tim resolved the question, yes? Glad to hear that Xenobot Mk V (talk · contribs) was rated Best in Class among tagging bots ;> –xenotalk 12:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
It was stiff competition, but your little bot pulled it off in the last minute. ;)
I am creating a template which I will post on the talk page of wikiprojects which subscribe to User:DASHBot. As the best tagging bot, I will mention your bot as a way to increase the number of articles in their wikiprojects. Interested wikiprojects could use your bot to increase their wikiproject pages, which will allow User:DASHBot to compile more comprehensive unreferenced BLP lists.
If mentioning your bot is a problem you can simply change this template, removing your bot name from the wikiprojects. I really hope you don't mind me advertising your world class bot, if you decline mentioning your bot in the template, there simply is no good substitute.
I will send you the link to the template as soon as I write it. Thanks again sir. Okip 23:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
The page is: User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/welcome I haven't sent it out yet. Thanks. Okip 23:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
No objections - thank you. –xenotalk 03:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:Xenobot_Mk_V/process

I rewrote this template slightly. I hope that I stated what this bot does correctly. thanks! Okip 23:52, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look. –xenotalk 03:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Userboxen

Wikipedia:UB#Merge_duplicates_of_same_template suggests that there shouldn't be more than one userbox that says practically the same thing. I didn't think they warranted a merge since it would include a cross-namespace redirect from userspace to template space. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, but that page is not deletion policy. –xenotalk 20:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Mlpearc and AWB

Just so you are a aware (just incase you are no longer watching his/her talk page), I have had to warn this user again in regards to their AWB usage here. I'm not advocating any particular action, just wished to bring it to your attention. Jeni (talk) 21:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Scratch that, I advocate removing his/her access to AWB asap, the discussion has taken a worrying turn. Jeni (talk) 22:10, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I explianed what happend I thought if the program said nothing wrong then all's good. I see what I've done. Mlpearc MESSAGE 22:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Looks like this situation sorted itself out. I agree that you are probably well-advised to gain some more experience before diving into mass editing. –xenotalk 03:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

deleted content request

hello i am looking to have a page provided to me, it was deleted. Please provide me with a copy of the article to allow me to work on it. The article was entitled Rob McDowall.

Kind regards


David --Np097264 22:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Np097264 (talk • contribs)

The All-around Amazing Barnstar

All Around Amazing Barnstar
You do so much work in so many different areas, there isn't really a specific barnstar which is fully adequate here other than this one! I just wanted to give my thanks to you, happy editing! Taelus (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Just to say, I second this barn star! I see you around and occasionaly pop by here, you deserve it! I won't give you a second one right away, don't want to be jumping on the bandwagon! I'll get round to it one day! :) Happy Friday! Jeni (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

RfD/Bugzilla

Thank you for the courtesy note. However, I have no idea what is being discussed. What is this Bugzilla supposed to do, and why does it make the templates obsolete? I don't think it has anything to do with computer translations, but if it does, I say Keep the templates and Delete Bugzilla, speedily. Kelisi (talk) 15:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Basically the templates are being used as a poor man's way to attribute the earlier edits from which the article was translated. The bugzilla means we can just import those old edits here, to the English Wikipedia. But please do make your opinion known at the TFD. (If you still hold the views that you did in the original TFD, you would still be voting "keep" for the reasons you mentioned there). Cheers, –xenotalk 15:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the courtesy note. --FocalPoint (talk) 16:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Gastropods

Yes, those should be tagged so I've added the 221 extra categories your bot found. Thought I had them all, but shows what I know! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

If it makes you feel any better, my initial report was wrong; there was actually only 7 additional articles when you added all those extra categories =) –xenotalk 23:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
In future, if you want me to scan any category lists (or even the main category) downstream I can help you with that. And then you trim what I find. Or just grab WP:AWB and do what I do =) –xenotalk 23:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I didn't realize AWB would do it. Thanks for the heads up on that. Would of saved me time with the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Songs/Categories that I did early. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I my have a job for Xenobot

Hi. I was reading what you say about what your bot gets up to and may have a job for it. Interested? It's probably tens of thousands of edits. There is a current discussion at WT:ACTOR#Filmography about how they're presented and about how they are implemented; currently, heaps of table markup and css are hard coded into a large number of actor bios. There seem to be two main forms, described at WT:ACTOR#hard-coded markup, and they may end-up refactored to use a template, discussed at WT:ACTOR#table headings via templates. There's also the possibility that the tables will be pared back to bulleted lists, which is not as straightforward a search and replace.

There's also the possibility that I'd do this myself, but I'd have to get a bot account approved and do some trials to get into practice. Cheers, Jack Merridew 00:35, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I took a look briefly. It looks doable. Just let me know when things are finalized (consensus, templates, etc.) and give me some example edits for the desired result. –xenotalk 00:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. The discussion has be going on for a couple of weeks and there was another large discussion last year. I know the thread is long, but more opinions are welcome. Cheers, Jack Merridew 01:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

iw-ref

Hi,
I think the nom of the interlanguage templates focused on the wrong issue. :) I still can't figure out when that template is supposed to be used, and where, and from what I can tell many editors have quite different opinions on it. Doesn't look like consensus so far, if it's kept we should nonetheless begin working to split those concerns into different templates to at least make clear where to use which, and when.
Amalthea 13:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I'm not really sure why they were created. Maybe trace it back to the source? If that person is still even active =) –xenotalk 13:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Why do you block people?

Why do you block people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.94.201.87 (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Typically because they have been vandalizing Wikipedia. –xenotalk 19:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Inactive admin email

I'm ready to pull the trigger on it. To be honest I don't think I really need the bot flag on the account, I can just send them slow enough and it won't matter. Code is at User:InactivityEmailBot/source. I'm manually culling the opt-out list you provided. Anything else before I do it? InactivityEmailBot (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Well you don't have formal approval, but by the same token you're not editing the Wikipedia and Wikipedia:E-mailing users doesn't seem to have any prohibition on these types of blasts. I dunno, if you want to be extra cautious, you could just ping a BAGger or use {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} and ask if you can proceed. –xenotalk 20:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Gigs (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

iPhone

I also use the iPhone at times. Just watching an iPhone SDK development video. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it would be that hard to develop a decent iPhone editing app. I'm sure it would be well-received. Could even offer a pay version with funds (or a portion thereof) being donated to the WMF. –xenotalk 00:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Are you thinking of doing it yourself? I use PC's exclusively and would be buying a Mac + SDK + license for the task. At least $2000 before the project is started. Apparently it takes three weeks to learn the SDK, then development time on top. Not a small thing. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
No, I was guessing that it oughtn't be too hard. I would never have the time - even if I were up-to-speed on the language =) And likewise, am a PC. You should try and get the WMF to bankroll you =) –xenotalk 01:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I hadn't thought there would be funding available. Where do I go on WMF? Could you make a list of things you'd like from such an app? Will give the idea some thought. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I was half joking, but you could poke around http://wikimediafoundation.org ... Maybe ask User:Durova, she seems to have an ear to the ground on funding sources. –xenotalk 12:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Essay Assessment

I've written a long response to your last post at the talk page for WP:ESSAY C/C. Would like to know what you think. Oh, and if you've got time to review a FAC I've made, check out St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao. Thanks. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 06:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the essay thing. To be honest I've never reviewed a featured article before - I wouldn't know where to start. –xenotalk 12:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

RaRa DRV -- Draft ready

You commented on the deletion review on RaRa. I have prepared a userspace draft, linked in that DRV discussion. I think it deals with the problem of insufficient sourcing. Your comments would be welcome. DES (talk) 07:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I've mainspaced your draft and closed the DRV as such. Thank you for your efforts. –xenotalk 12:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Haunted Games - I need my code back please

Hello. An Administrator deleted / removed my Haunted Games article for my company and I spent hours working on the code for it. If you would kindly send me the code, that would be quite helpful to me. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haunted360 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like this was taken care of: User:Haunted360/Haunted Games. –xenotalk 12:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Bot Appropriate?

I'm curious, since you are way more knowledgable about Bots than I am, if this request is an appropriate use for a bot[27], particularly considering the user who made the request used the previous tool is his referring to basically make personal attacks against others he considers a "deletionist" (see his user page for his lengthy diatribes against said users). I have a vested interest in knowing if this request is appropriate and will be filled, since I am one of the editors he pulled that with, but also curious in general, if such a bot is the appropriate way to gather any kind of statistics on other editors outside of the RfA type things. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The tool/bot itself seems innocuous - I don't think you could build a case against it on its merits. How a user uses or presents that data is another story, of course. –xenotalk 21:42, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Inherit

Why didn't this inherit (Start class) from other projects? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

It's doing the autostub task. Article has a {{stub}} template. I can have it inherit when higher if you want. If so, stop the bot - I'll restart it later. –xenotalk 19:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I see. It's marked as a stub because it has a stub template. So inheritance is on but in this case the template takes priority. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

For the tail part of this autostub task, I skipped if there was a higher rating present. Would you mind checking a few out and letting me know what you think? Is the "stub" generally correct or is it evenly mixed, etc? –xenotalk 23:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

stub template on article, but rated higher by other projects

  1. Talk:Zemirot
  2. Talk:You See Me Crying
  3. Talk:You'll Never Walk Alone (song)
  4. Talk:Working on the Highway
  5. Talk:William Bernard
  6. Talk:Who Do You Love Now?
  7. Talk:Where Would We Be Now
  8. Talk:When Spirits Are Calling My Name
  9. Talk:We Cry
  10. Talk:Wawasan 2020
  11. Talk:Watching the River Flow
  12. Talk:Vrag naj vzame
  13. Talk:Vladimir Vlasov
  14. Talk:Vita vidder
  15. Talk:Vincas Kudirka
  16. Talk:V for Villanova
  17. Talk:Un Blodymary (song)
  18. Talk:TSOP (The Sound of Philadelphia)
  19. Talk:Tsendiin Damdinsüren
  20. Talk:Tokyo ni mo Attanda/Muteki no Kimi
  21. Talk:To Love Somebody (song)
  22. Talk:Tillit Sidney Teddlie
  23. Talk:Throw Ya Hands Up
  24. Talk:The Wrestler (song)
  25. Talk:Tenkyu (New Summer Version)
  26. Talk:Summer Girl (song)
  27. Talk:Sing Along
  28. Talk:She Was So Pretty
  29. Talk:Shallow (song)
  30. Talk:Seydou Badian Kouyaté
  31. Talk:Run Devil Run (song)
  32. Talk:Romantica (song)

Do you know way a way to reduce the Category Unassessed song articles? Manually assessing 17,451 articles them would be about 2 months solid work with very little to be gained. In the absence of any information from stub categories or other Project tags could the bot assess them all as stubs? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Article size in bytes could be used a a metric. I think you can even tell the banner to report "stub" if no class and article size < (x) which would eliminate the need for the bot to actually make edits. –xenotalk 00:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
That seems way cool! Do you know of any WikiProject doing that? So I can compare and see if they had problems/success with the idea? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Nothing on {{WPBannerMeta}} Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
WPBiography toyed with the idea but didn't put it into practice. Songs would be the first, I believe. –xenotalk 00:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
  • There are about 250 class disagreements. Do you want to use looser logic? I can tag what the majority says, or the higher or lower rating, etc. Let me know. –xenotalk 01:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Add Xenobot Mk V exclude category?

Could this have an exclude categories also. So for example you can include songs but not songs that are in the discography category? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that wouldn't be too hard to implement. –xenotalk 18:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted content request

Hi, I have made a page about Marc A. Pullen, and it got deleted, saying that the person wasnt important and so on. I would like that the page is being put back up, because that person is important, he ws a hobby musician (for proof look here: http://www.last.fm/music/Marc+A.+Pullen/+wiki) and he was one of the creators of the QDOOM game, and several mods for it, he also made game music for the game: Sauerbraten and some of the ealier DOOM games thank you for your time, Danny —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannyleestrube (talk • contribs) 03:50, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

See User:Dannyleestrube/Marc A. Pullen and WP:BIO. –xenotalk 12:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Quick question

We can pretty much hand out "confirmed" status like candy, right? As long as I've reviewed their edits so far, and they seem to be a good faith account, there aren't any other hoops I should make them jump through, are there? NB, this is kind of a cart before the horse question, as I just did it... But would be good to know for next time. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Hand it out liberally, retract it at the first sign of trouble. If you could also watch WP:PERM/C, it's not very well-watched. Cheers, –xenotalk 14:46, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Thx. Will add that to my ever-expanding watchlist (until I delete the whole thing in frustration again). --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to my world... "You have 15,176 pages on your watchlist (excluding talk pages)." –xenotalk 14:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

unprotection. Kyzyl-Agash dam

Kyzyl-Agash dam needs to be moved to Kyzyl-Agash Dam. Not sure if you would see my response if I put it on Requests for page protection. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (talk) 19:21, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done - could you kindly update the prose? Thank you, –xenotalk 19:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Are we allowed to nominate other editors for the rollback tool on this wiki? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, you're not prohibited from doing so, btu I think it's probably a bad idea. Users might not understand why the rollback links showed up all-of-a-sudden, and might not understand their appropriate use. You might give them advice to request it at WP:PERM/R. –xenotalk 18:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I was thinking of nominating User:Brianann MacAmhlaidh after seeing him double undo vandalism. If I alert him after nominating him, would that be better? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Yea, point him to the wp:rollback page for advice on how and when to use the tool. –xenotalk 18:54, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

John Pershing

Your protection of the censored version of the John Pershing article is a disgrace. Go ahead and remove the articles for "Nigger", "Nigger Kojack", "Nigger of the Narcissus", ect., whilst you're at it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, huh? And someone is allowed to remove a piece of information with 62 different cites. Nice. Don't bother blocking me. (Or go ahead, as you're obviously drunk with power, and I'm sure you'll feel even better about yourself if you do.) In any case, I have no interest in being involved with this new, censored Wikipedia.Mk5384 (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Please see m:Wrong version and continue the resolution of the dispute (over which I hold no personal opinion) at the talk page of the article. I protected the article to end an edit war and avoid blocks of the participants. I would also advise you to take note of the concern raised at ANI regarding your tendency to use aggressive language on user talk pages. –xenotalk 14:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Mk, one reason the protection makes sense is that other editors, such as I, who simply went to the article and saw a single editor reverting against many, making a POV-looking edit, would simply revert you out. This would do no good, and would frustrate you further. I would also point out that you were at 3 reverts, and had the article not been locked, you might have reverted again, and that would have been a Bad Thing. I am sorry I did the revert before reading the talk page in this specific case, but WP works by editors editing, rather than by editors thinking about maybe considering making an edit.- Sinneed 15:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Xeno, Thanks for this edit. I should have thought of that when I changed the section head, and I hope my comment above is not troublesome or unwelcome.- Sinneed 15:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Meaning to ask for a long time.

Where did you get your username from? Xenu, or Zeno the ancient philosopher. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

It's actually a shortened form of Xenocidic (shortened not long after I become an administrator for reasons explained at User talk:Xenocidic/RFA#Potential for username to be divisive) and it is a derivative of the word Xenocide from Ender's Game series of novels by Orson Scott Card. –xenotalk 15:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Nice it's been a long time since I read that series but I liked Bean! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm somewhat behind; I need to read A War of Gifts and Ender in Exile. I think I was waiting for the soft-covers, for consistency =) –xenotalk 15:47, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

inadvertent rollback

hands off my comments

that's all i got.Bali ultimate (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

A little AGF, please [28] (or alternatively, assume clumsiness over malice: I would've used an edit summary were I explicitly removing your comment). I was just on the way to your talk page to apologize for the mistake (I didn't even realize the gaff until I saw you undo me at ANI). –xenotalk 17:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Problem fixed now.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:19, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thats an odd paraphrasing of 'I'm sorry, Xeno. I jumped the gun on agf. No harm done'. ;) Syrthiss (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Meh... I'll take it. On a side note @Bali, see WP:NEWSECTION. –xenotalk 18:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

National-Anarchism

Hello Xeno. I've been editing, expanding and improving the Wikipedia article on National-Anarchism for months now. Unfortunately, since January 2009, I've been trying to end an edit war between me and User:Paki.tv and User:Harrypotter who both insist on editing the article to push a POV based on sources of dubious reliability. I have repeatedly suggested to them that they should stop editing or reverting the article to add contentious words until the dispute is resolved on talk page. They have either ignored these suggestions and/or often engaged in discussion in bad faith. Therefore, could you please put a temporary full block on this article at my last edit and moderate our discussion on talk page until this dispute is resolved once and for all? --Loremaster (talk) 19:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Protecting the page in your preferred version at your request would be an abuse of process... I typically don't involve myself in the nitty-gritty of content disputes (I have neither the time nor the inclination). Perhaps you should seek a 3rd opinion or WP:MEDCAB assistance. –xenotalk 19:04, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
After you committed not to edit war, you basically dove right back into that article and started edit warring again? ... Explain to me why I shouldn't reblock you indefinitely? I unblocked you on your commitment not to edit war - just because you stopped short of a 4th revert doesn't mean you're not edit warring! –xenotalk 19:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
uh, I am confused... Have you read my edit summaries of the National-Anarchism page and my comments on the Talk:National-Anarchism page? I am contacting you to specifically to avoid an edit war because User:Paki.tv (and User:Harrypotter) categorically refuse to stop reverting the article until this dispute is resolved on the talk page. I haven't violated 3RR and I don't plan to. I need your help to end this non-sense. --Loremaster (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I asked you to consider a personal 1RR (1 revert rule) policy. Just because you didn't break 3RR doesn't mean you weren't edit warring. You can edit war without going over the bright-line. Please review the Wikipedia:Edit warring policy in full. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't realize this, but the next time you edit war like this, I will have to reblock your account. –xenotalk 19:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
To be honest, I was exceptionally trying to use the fear of violating the 3RR to force User:Paki.tv into engaging in discussion because he has always ignored my plea that he should stop re-adding disputed words to the article until the dispute is resolved on the talk page. But I've learned my lesson in light of your reaction. I will never do this again. That being said, can you please block this article and moderate the talk page? I can't spend the rest of 2010 dealing with this never-ending dispute... :/ --Loremaster (talk) 19:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
As indicated above, were I to protect this article in your preferred version, at your request, it would be an abuse of my administrative tools. I don't have the time, the energy, or the familiarity with the subject matter, to involve myself with this dispute... Please run it up the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution flagpole. Perhaps an {{rfctag}} on the talk page to seek outside opinions. –xenotalk 19:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
OK. --Loremaster (talk) 20:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
OK. --Loremaster (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Too short block

Hello, Xeno (talk · contribs). As you can see, this IP has been vandalizing your userpage. I just wanted to let you know I feel your block of this IP was much too short. The IP should have been blocked at least several weeks, after such severe vandalism. Immunize (talk) 19:16, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I typically use a sliding scale of increasing lengths, usually something like: 31h,72h,1 week,2 weeks,1 month,3 months,6 months,1 year. Sometimes I skip steps, but I typically start off small. Given that this is a school IP, I'm sure they'll be back at which time I'll probably jump it up to 2 weeks. –xenotalk 19:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I suppose the main reason I feel this IP needs a longer block is because it vandalized my userpage severely. Immunize (talk) 19:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

If you consider that 'severe', you might want to get out of the RC-patrolling business =) –xenotalk 19:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Definitely not. Immunize (talk) 19:36, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

If they resume vandalizing, re-report to AIV. Thanks, –xenotalk 19:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


National Anarchism

I can't help but feel that your support for Loremaster/Ghostinthewiki is in appropriate. As soon as you unblocked this character, they removed the discussion to the archive, and then put their own material up on the talk page. Please can you explain to me how I can assume goodfaith when:

  • I asked Ghostinthewiki if they had another identity on wikipedia and they directly lied.
  • The first thing they do following you unblocking them is immediately return to what they were doing before.
  • They archive all the previous discussion

I am afraid your actions have caused so much frustration that I think I shall leave off editing for a while, as I do not want to tell you what I think of you, as it might turn out to be a little impolite. Have a nice day.Harrypotter (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was not impressed with that either. I unarchived the recent discussions. I'm filing a request for mediation. Hopefully some middle ground may be reached. –xenotalk 21:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Update scheduled for CountryAbbr2

27-March-10: User:Xeno, User:Plastikspork: After months of planning and days of testing, I have finally submitted an edit-request for Template:CountryAbbr2. See request: Template talk:CountryAbbr#Change to Template:CountryAbbr2 to drop 50 million wikilinks. Feel free to update or let someone else handle it. The database report counted 68,100 transclusions. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Honesty is refreshing

"I fear change." Heh, heh. A little bit of honesty, rare on WP. Thank you.David Spector 16:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

How do you get that beautiful header ("Notes:...I will usually reply here...")? I've been trying to use a wikitable, but it looks awful. I want it for my talk page. David Spector 17:03, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I ended up having to use HTML table because of some parserfunctions and such that I'm using on my header. Feel free to lift the code from User talk:Xeno/header. –xenotalk 17:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Handling question

Did I handle the whole notification of a user's move here idealy? Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Replied here.

RFA-Finder Bug

Re Fixed. The script doesn't work unless the category links are piped. —Animum (talk) 00:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Question

I was editing my watch list and found this page Wikipedia:User:Mlpearc/Work, I'm asking you because your name appears more often, am I missing something ? This page has my user name ? I looked at it, didn't see anything pertaining to me. Can you shed some light ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlpearc (talk • contribs) 23:37, 29 March 2010

It seems you cut and pasted this from a Village Pump on March 13. The original thread is here: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 59/Archives/ 48#Soft-block of school IPs.. –xenotalk 00:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Patuxay

Can you move this so Patuxai. This is the most common name and that is also used in the commons thanks. Then text will be added shortly afterwards. Dr. Blofeld White cat 16:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. By the by, Xeno would now gently, but undoubtedly point you towards WP:NEWSECTION. :) Amalthea 16:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I tried that, but he is evil. –xenotalk 16:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

igloo

Thanks for your interest in igloo. You have been added to the script whitelist, and the program should now allow you to connect. Ale_Jrbtalk 23:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Sweet! Thanks, –xenotalk 23:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Still can't connect to server but could be a local firewall thing. Will try again from home. –xenotalk 23:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Possibly DNS issues - I couldn't get it yesterday and a few other people could, soo... If it still doesn't work, give it a day or something. Ale_Jrbtalk 23:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Probably not the problem, but I find I have to reapeatadle refresh the web page (up to five times or so), every time it stops doing stuff :). - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Should now be fixed with regards to the whitelist. I dunno about the firewall - it just loads code from alejrb.x10hosting.com. Ale_Jrbtalk 14:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record and anyone curious, my problem was related to this. =\ –xenotalk 18:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

fyi re that bot run across the actor bios

I've re-posted a request to close the WP:ACTOR RfC at WP:AN#Stuck RfC @ WT:ACTOR#Filmography and have referred to your offer to apply your bot to the task once the dust has settled. Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, poke me when there's something to be done =) –xenotalk 17:08, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Questions

2 Questions.

1) How do you get those notes to appear at the top of your talk page and at the top when someone is editing it.

2) I've been studying coding lately, what language does wikipedia use?

Thanks!--Ezekiel 7:19 Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign) 14:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

  1. It is an edit notice, just edit Special:Mytalk/Editnotice.
  2. Not sure... Mediawiki says its written in PHP... –xenotalk 14:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I won't, sorry. I'm doing to many things at once.--Ezekiel 7:19 Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign) 16:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Anti-vandal audio alarm embedded in warning templates

Hi Xeno,

I'm not sure where to field this idea but here goes...

Could audio alarms be added to 2nd level warning templates and higher using html embed tags (or alternate method)?

example: <EMBED src="vandalalarm.wav" autostart=true loop=true volume=100 hidden=true><NOEMBED><BGSOUND src="vandalalarm.wav"></NOEMBED>

I'd love to see this happen because I'm picturing the kids sitting in their classrooms or the library when suddenly an audible alarm (3 computer beeps {Java?} followed by a wav with a voice saying "Wikipedia vandal alert!") embarrasses them and lets the instructors know what is going on. I'm hoping this could help cut down on school-kid vandals.

What do you think?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I sincerely hope this isn't serious... ╟─TreasuryTag►Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster─╢ 17:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it's a good idea, but this would be proposed at WT:UW. –xenotalk 17:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
What would be the downsides? It is a serious thought...I'm open-minded about it.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I just think that having auto-starting sounds on Wikipedia is a bad idea all around. What's to stop someone from sending it to me as a joke? I think it's probably prevented in the HTML parser anyway. –xenotalk 17:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Good point on the joke aspect. What if this was something for admins-only and issued with a block? Avoid abuse that way.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I still think it's prevented from the HTML parser and don't really think it will be effective. Most school PCs aren't wired for sound (at least they weren't when I was a young whippersnapper). –xenotalk 17:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

<== Thank you for your thoughts...I'll think on it some more. Given the date, I can see why TT thought I might not be serious. :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 18:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh geez I forgot all about that! =) –xenotalk 18:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

You did a good thing

I just wanted to express that I have no doubt you did what you thought was a good thing in the best interest of the user. Please do not mistake my notifications and comments as in anyway directed against you or saying that you did anything wrong. I am just trying to notify some of the other users who have been heavily involved in this just in case it goes south. Thanks! -OberRanks (talk) 18:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Not at all - thank you for the note. –xenotalk 18:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

My apologies. I had thought from the surrounding discourse that there was some ArbCom case involved, and those of us who routinely review unblock requests generally know better than to get involved under those circumstances.

As far as that other page goes, it was created by someone else with the same name a long time ago and has nothing to do with me. Perhaps I should usurp the account to prevent its potential misuse. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries. And yes, I would advise usurping the account just in case. There are no GFDL/cc-by-sa significant edits and it's been dormant since 2005. –xenotalk 18:26, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

You back?

If so, I'm ready to rock on WP:ESSAY C/C. If the formula looks good to you, let's generate the results page, apply the formula, and then get the bot on it. I'm excited! ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 18:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I'll get this rolling... Probably tomorrow, maybe this evening. –xenotalk 18:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Awesome. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 18:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Headers on the edit window for your talk

I noticed you have a header that appears when I make an edit on your page. I tried to mimic it by going to User talk:ShadowRangerRIT/Editnotice, but when I got there, it was asking if I wanted to leave a message. If I "leave a message" will that become the edit notice, or is there a more involved way of setting this up? I don't want to accidentally fsck up my talk page. —ShadowRanger (talk|stalk) 21:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Try it and see; it's the wiki way. But yes, what you type there will be the edit notice for your talk page. You might find the {{editnotice}} template useful. Or just steal (with attribution!) and modify Xeno's. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Usually I would, but with "special" pages like this (another example being the monobook page), I'd rather not risk damage I can't fix on my own. Thanks for the info! —ShadowRanger (talk|stalk) 21:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Floq is right; just edit the /Editnotice on your talk page. Not much can go wrong, and you can always db-u1 if you fubar something =). –xenotalk 23:49, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


Archive 15←Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23→Archive 25
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xeno/Archive_21&oldid=1251550875"