This user is a native of Hong Kong. |
This user is a citizen of the United Kingdom. |
This user lives in France. |
...
Ampersand
Add this to your user page by typing in {{Styletips}} |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. Noticed you referring to WP:MOSNUM in your edit summary when converting ISO dates to another format. Please would you only change ISO dates to one of the formats acceptable at WP:MOSNUM#Full date formatting, rather than the 30 Jan., 2009 you used at Ashley Young. In the case of Mr Young, a British sportsperson, that would be the international format 30 January 2009, i.e. month written out in full and no punctuation. Thanks, Struway2 ( talk) 07:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I forgot about that. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 17:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
G'day! Just a quick note: it appears that your script does not recognise "urbanized" when converting to the -ise spelling. Would you be able to correct this? Cheers, Hayden120 ( talk) 11:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Will try to do this, bit busy just now. Rich Farmbrough, 19:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC).
I thought the convention was that years exceeding 4 digits, like numbers exceeding 3 digits, retained commas. If I'm wrong, or if there's a WP:MOSDATE clause to the contrary, I apologize. I partially reverted your edit at Year 2038 problem. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion I suggest that you make the script ignore text within category names to keep this from happening (scroll to the bottom, of course.) — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 15:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't really appreciate this. Tony was the one attacking, making snide comments that had nothing to do with the subject, [1] making false accusations, [2] and digging up the dirt. [3] Like the first snide comment, that had nothing to do with the subject and all of those were devoid of fact. -- AussieLegend ( talk) 04:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
It's true that Koavf and I have had some bloody wretched disagreements in the past. I, however, have determined to get on with the business of building an encyclopædia and purposefully avoid conflict. I no longer keep an eye on his contribs (he still watches mine), but our paths cross at times, and there are some editing patterns that I still feel the need to comment on. I prefer to not have conflict, and hopefully time will take care of that. Radiopathy •talk• 02:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Please have a look when you have time. Maybe you can suggest a better name for it.
Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition
Arilang talk 13:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost have decide that you should not be able to read commentary on the problems with censorship. This is the first time commentary has been censored from the Wikipedia Signpost, however, evidently, speaking out against Jimbo Wales' actions in the recent Commons debacle is too controversial.
Since I started editing Wikipedia, I've created literally hundreds of Featured pictures, a dozen or so Featured articles, a couple Featured portals, a featured list, and various other things.
What has my reward been?
I've been harassed, bullied, and generally treated like dirt. An arbcom case was opened by Charles Matthews, then a sitting arbitrator, to punish me for not immediately agreeing to his request to reconsider a block, with no additional information than "I think it's a good idea". I instead sought opinions on ANI, and so Charles Matthews got his friends in the Arbcom to harass me for three months. After two months, they decided that they really should have sought other means of dispute resolution, and opened an RfC... which came out firmly in my decfense. This wasn't what they wanted, so they ignored it, attacked those who spoke out against me, and did what they wanted
It took a year for the Arbcom to finally agree to withdraw the case, replacing it with an apology, and detailing the many procedural and ethical lapses.
More recently, I've been blocked for having an arbcom statement slightly over the limit - while I was in the middle of a lengthy rewrite. The other user I was in dispute with also had a statement over the limit throughout that time... and was never so much as warned.
Wikipedia treats its users like shit, but, ironically, only the long-time experienced users. If you ever begin to become jaded, your upset at Wikipedia will be used to implement more injustices.
Here we see an example. At the start of the news cycle, I wrote an editorial, following the Signpost's stated guideance for such. When it was done, I was told that they no longer publish editorials, and, instead of raising a fuss, I offered to simply publish it as a comment to stories, and the thread discussing it was closed.
Two hours before publication, the editor of the Signpost deleted the comment, without telling anyone. I objected; he had participated in the discussion, and the discussion had been closed for nearly a week, with the comment ready for publication throughout that time. I had dropped my insistence on publication of editorials, or any attempt to revise the article into a non-editorial overview, based on what I had seen as the agreement.
Now, not only is talking about censorship censored, but even a private complaint about at the [ http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AWikipedia_Signpost%2FNewsroom&action=historysubmit&diff=375694073&oldid=375693486 editor making grossly inaccurate personal attacks against me, based on patently false allegations, has been censored.
I quit. Both the Signpost, and Wikipedia.
Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I've started a discussion here that you may be interested in. Radiopathy •talk• 16:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
This user is the proud winner of a Silliest wikilink of the month award. |
It makes the changes and tags the article, but I don't get the "difs" so that I can see what changes took place and edit if necessary. Radiopathy •talk• 01:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi!!!
I was looking at your script and I think you could simplify it a lot if you use an array to store the "substitution rules". I did this in another script I use at pt.wikisource for OCR corrections and it seems that the same principle apply here. You could use something like this for the rules:
var table = {
'aluminum': '$1aluminium',
'artifact': '$1artefact',
...
};
and then do a loop through it:
for (var word in table) {
regex_function1(word, tableword]);
}
The regex_function1
would be created with the code which is currently used explicitly in each row of your code. For example:
function regex_function1(w1, w2) {
var regex1 = new RegExp('([^\\w\\d\\-\\/])' + w1, 'g')
txt.value=txt.value.replace(regex1, w2);
}
What do you think?
By the way, did you notice my previous comment?
Have a nice week! Helder 13:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(<.+?>[^<]+?)
, ([^<]+?<\/.+?>)
, (\[Category:[^\]]*?)
, etc... (which appears in lots of lines) to outside your table and put it only inside a loop (or a function). This could make the code more understandable and easy to update... =) (note that I did this for ([^\\w\\d\\-\\/])
in the example above). This is another reason why I use more than one table...
Helder 21:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)It missed "color" here and "flavored" here. Radiopathy •talk• 02:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Rye Toe! I tried it on Flavored liquor (I didn't save it, of course) and it got every instance. Radiopathy •talk• 04:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't get it to do Mother's Little Helper again, but it worked great on 'lemon-flavored' at Lemonade. Radiopathy •talk• 04:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, I would like to invite you to a discussion on setting up good guidelines for tennis player notability. Please feel free to give comments and suggestions there. Thank you. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 09:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a note that editing other users' comments (as you did here) is inappropriate, per WP:TALKO - it's always assumed that editors have written their own comments, and by adding a "weasel words" tag into someone else's sentence, it makes it look as if the original author must have added it themselves. If you want to pick up on a particular phrase, just mention it in your response. I've removed the tag, I'll leave you to re-edit your last comment however you like, in light of this. Thanks. -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
As you've previously commented on this topic, your attention and participation is invited here: Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost#Ncmvocalist_needs_to_step_down_or_be_replaced — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Ohconfucius! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 3 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 940 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{ unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 10:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You seem to be running some kind of script to clean up articles, such as Gregorian calendar. Please take care that the script does not introduce citation templates in articles that do not use them, and that it does not unlink significant years. Jc3s5h ( talk) 16:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
though note that templates should not be added without consensus to an article that already uses a consistent referencing style.
Because templates can be contentious, editors should not change an article with a distinctive citation format to another without gaining consensus. Where no agreement can be reached, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.
Just a quick note to point out that on this article, which I wrote, when you were properly fixing some MOSNUM problems, you also changed the wording of a couple of direct quotes to bring them into compliance with MOSNUM. Obviously, the wording of a direct quote should never be changed - since they were blockquotes, I figure you probably didn't notice they were quotes at the time, which is understandable. Still, I'm bringing it to your attention (even though your edit was almost two months ago -- I just noticed the mistake now) so you'll be sensitized to the problem in the future. Best, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 01:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, what's your intention with
Category:Use British English? It is categorized as a cleanup category (i.e. category of pages that have some kind of a problem that should be fixed), but from the descriptions it seems to me that it should just list articles written in British English. Also, it says that {{
EngvarB}}
will add an article to that category, but that's not the the case (at least currently).
Svick (
talk) 08:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I've just created Category:Use dmy dates -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Looks like he's reverted your 3RR warning to him. His contribution and user talk page history suggests he's been a problem editor in the past, so he bears watching, I think. Strange Passerby ( talk) 06:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 15:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, the semi-protected for Hong Kong expires in 20 September 2010, I feel like we should take this opportunity to push the article to FA status without vandalism interferences. I started cleaning up the History section since that was a section where we received large amount of negative remarks on. I thought about requesting a copy-editor to take quick look at it too, since I'm concern about WP:FA Criteria 1a. Thanks, Ta-Va-Tar ( discuss– what?) 03:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to know why you reverted my edits in the article. --FDJoshua22 11:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Next time remember to notify the uploader when you tag something for speedy-deletion. I've started a discussion thread on this page. -- Der yck C. 12:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi!!!
How is everything?
You probably will like to know that at fr.wikisource they have a script (fr:s:
oldwikisource:MediaWiki:Modernisation.js) which is used for modernization of texts written in old dialects. The script allow the reader to click in a menu in the sidebar to see the modernized version of text, based on a table of "old word" : "new word" pairs available at
fr:s:Wikisource:Dictionnaire.
You can test it acessing, for example, the page fr:s:La Cigale et la Fourmi and clicking at "Texte modernisé" in the sidebar (then the text of the page will change accordingly to the dictionary - but since there is an image in the beginning of the page, it may be a good idea to see the page in full screen mode to notice the changes happening ;-) ).
I found this when I proposed a similar feature (from MediaWiki) at multilingual wikisource: Using LanguageConverter syntax at Wikisources.
Best regards =) Helder 22:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks a lot for agreeing to help with this! I'm starting EdwardsBot weekly as part of the Signpost publication process and the global bot's syntax seems to be basically the same, so I don't mind much if the process is 17 instead of 16 steps. But it would still save me time if you could do it.
One thing that should be worked out beforehand is the delivery format. I would suggest the same that we have been using for EdwardsBot so far ( example - a content list with a link to each story). Until interwiki transclusion becomes reality, the template that EdwardsBot uses here can't be used on other wikis. I've been working out how to extend Pretzels' Signpost template system by other display options (for other Signpost delivery formats such the RSS feed or mailing list announcements, but this should work as well). That would mean one would have a page here on en: with ready-made text (automatically updated as soon as the new issue comes out) for copying+pasting into the spam page on Meta.
Regards, HaeB ( talk) 05:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello Ohconfucius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tennessee Technology Center at Shelbyville, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 doesn't apply to schools, and it's not overly spammy. . Thank you. Ged UK 13:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am seeking to have someone explain the civility policy to User:Surturz here. Tony (talk) 16:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I've undone this change. "Earth" is a proper noun, so would be capitalised whether it was in a title or not; changing the redirect broke links such as the one in the lede of abiogenesis, which use life on Earth (note the lack of initial capital). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 12:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I see on my talk page that you nominated this article for deletion at 03:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC). It was then promptly deleted by user Kimchi.sg at 04:03, 9 September 2010. Since the article and its talk page are already deleted, it is not possible to contest the tagging as you suggested. So, what can be done to protest this undiscussed deletion? I wrote a message to Kimchi, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kimchi.sg#Regarding_protesting_the_deletion_of_.22Giorgi_Latsabidze.22, questioning this procedure and attempting to start a discussion. As I explained to him, I started this article last year, and it has been edited several times since then and numerous elements have been added. Some of these may be legitimately objectionable, but I cannot investigate this possibility since the current article is not accessible. So what do you suggest I do now? Music43lover ( talk) 20:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Fwiw, I hope you have read Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars (WP:DTTR) before performing such silly stunts again because ANI is not a good place for you to be. This is my advice for you. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Per WP:BRD, please state your opinion there above, rather to be a contentious editor yourself, when all I have done is 1 RR (Lambanog has stuck to WP:1RR so you should back off and mind your own business) prior to you wrongfully warning me for 3 RR. As I've mentioned above, knock it off before I take you to WP:ANI for this wrongful accusation. Take heed. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I've removed your request for another third opinion. I'm still active on the page and will continue to provide assistance. If you feel that my opinion is insufficient, though, consider WP:RFC. I've given 3Os for quite some time now, though, and hopefully I can help mediate this out. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for giving my contribution a haircut. I wasn't sure if there was a guideline on length. Is there? (Regardless, you improved my text anyway). hamiltonstone ( talk) 03:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
There will be a gathering in Hong Kong this weekend ( Wikipedia:Meetup/Hong_Kong_51) to commemorate the 5th anniversary of the Hong Kong Wikimedian community. Come along - I really hope a few more English Wikipedians will be there, and it'll be a good time to meet up and talk about things. -- Der yck C. 07:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Paris is linked in the tables in French Chess Championship because every city is linked in that column. Appearance and consistency are important in a table, and linking Paris is not distracting here. In fact, not linking Paris is a distraction because of the unnecessary difference in appearance for those entries. Quale ( talk) 03:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
You are correct in this case, in my opinion.
Paris is as well known as anything can be, particularly in this context.
The sea of Paris makes it that much harder to see the non-Paris cases, which often are places the average person has never heard of.
Consider restoring that link to Toulouse to show the contrast.
Good luck,
Varlaam (
talk) 04:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
• <--See this dot? That's the good luck barnstar, the tasteful, less ostentatious edition.
You may want to (if you haven't already) raid my monobook.js search for the confusingly named ==Spelling - did muck with header levels - now date formats per new MoS==. It is not bomb-proof and the older stuff elsewhere (years old) I'm sure is not as good as what you got from Lightmouse. Rich Farmbrough, 06:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC).
I've undone your redirect of List of books portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors to WP:CHILDPROTECT. I'll be asking at ANI for help fixing the talk page, so consider this a notification of that as well. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
These scripts are great, and as you are doing, I wouldn't hand these to just anybody you might even consider setting them up like AWB where you need approval before using them. One thing I see that could be rearranged is the Date script has a edit notice of [[WP:MOSNUM|unified date formats]], rem [[wp:overlink]] which I have yet to use Both scripts on the same article and the overlink script has no edit summary at all. each script needs it's own edit summary. As far as performance I did need to go to my .js page once so far and re-bypass my cache. Otherwise I love these scripts and again thanx for the hook up :P. Mlpearc powwow 15:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Mlpearc powwow 15:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Also I just noticed, is there a way to set the overlinking script to NOT, or give the option to not look at the infobox ? There's a lot of pages that could use a little overlinking clean up but, In most cases you would not want to de-link the infobox. Mlpearc powwow 14:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I removed your personal attack from my talk page, but I wanted to respond here to some of the factual claims within it.
1. "he seeks a way of giving it de facto permanence" - this is false. I seek broad community consensus for whatever we end up doing, and I support an orderly process of discussion and revision in the pursuit of that consensus. This is the Wikipedia way. I am unwilling to impose the will of the majority (which is strongly in support of Pending Changes) by fiat.
2. Your claims that I am trying to "save face" by imposing PC through some "unilateral" "dictat" is completely at odds with the facts.-- Jimbo Wales ( talk) 14:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Fancine, as the article has been at AfD before and therefore cannot be deleted via prod. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice to opening another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 20:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:ISO. Since you had some involvement with the Template:ISO redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bridgeplayer ( talk) 10:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
A GA Review of Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China is taking place, and the question of splitting out the section Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China#Falun Gong allegations: 2006 into a standalone article has been raised. This will be a controversial move as there are people who have objected to the allegation and corresponding report being a standalone article, and have insisted on merging it back into Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China. I support the content being moved into a standalone article, with a summary left behind, as currently this one allegation dominates the article. Added to which the allegation and the report have gained enough media attention to meet notability guidelines. My proposal is to create the article Kilgour-Matas report, leaving a summary behind, and to immediately open a discussion on WP:AfD regarding the notability of the topic. The version I would use is this one, and to update it with pertinent amendments made to Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China, using the images that are in that article. Your comments, suggestions, and involvement in this is welcomed and encouraged. SilkTork * YES! 14:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Just curious as to whether you see any existing concerns on the content relevant to the subject right now. John Carter ( talk) 17:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I've left you a message on Wikinews - Amgine ( talk) 02:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi!
I think you may like to test this script (together with this css). The script will add a menu at the top of pages and let you change the spellings from/to Britsh/American English based in lists of words (which currently are at Dictionary/en-US and /en-GB), editable by anyone.
You can see what happens in the dictionary pages, for example, or accessing articles where there are words in the lists (like Belgium and others). I don't know much of English, so the tables were just an adaptation of this table and may need revision by native English speakers ;-) Helder 16:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping up the drumbeat for sanity in linking to "in the news" Wikinews articles. It will take long time to get this changed, but we may see something changed if we keep it up! We have lots of supporters. Alas, so do they! :) Student7 ( talk) 12:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
What exactly do you have against Wikinews? or are you just crying out loud because no one cared there about your "proposed changes"? Nice vendetta. -- Diego Grez ( talk) 02:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Help WN by linking to its rehashes of the original news sources? No, that certainly should not be done, Diego. The model for WN was always fatally flawed: to rehash the main stories coming out of the big ones on the net. There are at least three problems:
I have received an email from a WN regular saying how appalled they are at the way I have been treated. Actually, I feel lucky compared with one person, who left only a few months ago after being treated dreadfully (look at the edit-summary), and here (straight after a death in the family), or someone else, who has left in disgust after a bout of abuse: no, the email was from a current regular at WN who would not dare to speak out on-wiki.
But I see that McNeil will escape without having to answer calls by several editors, some established, to justify his actions and behaviour. Thus, his behaviour will continue. It is dysfunctional to an extreme point, and needs to be addressed by the Foundation. You have a hide coming here and whining about why WP doesn't link to WN. I would prefer to discuss with you and others there how WN's model can be changed to enable it to survive.
Before you lurch into the same old anti-en.WP resentment fest that McNeil has sucked you and others there into, please remember that I came there as a friend, to help in what I am expert at: language, style guides, and the framing of advice to professionals. It's my RL job, as well as a pursuit on en.WP. You continue to support a corrupt power regime in which one bureaucrat acts against the most basic rules, including heavily "involved" actions and rank rudeness, insults, and bullying; and the other then stops discussion of it by freezing the ~ANI page. The advice of the steward is ingored. I see that McNeil will escape without having to answer calls by several editors, some established, to justify his actions and behaviour. Thus, his behaviour will continue. It is dysfunctional to an extreme point, and needs to be addressed by the Foundation. You have a hide coming here and whining about why WP doesn't link to WN. I would prefer to discuss with you and others there how WN's model can be changed to enable it to survive than to deal with your support of the status quo. Tony (talk) 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
What also exercises my mind is how to increase the readership. It might be heresy on my part (?), but I think they should consider (1) deadlined publications, less frequent, since they have much larger impact and are an easier way to gain "branding" (branding is what WP has ... it's what WN conspicuously lacks). And (2) a careful mix of op eds—really well-written, interesting ones.
These are just off-the-cuff thoughts that have been rootling around in my mind for a week. Perhaps a combination of both specific-time publications and a continuous, ongoing "breaking news" section that is updated regularly. Unsure.
What WN desperately needs as well is more editors, an open culture, and a smoother relationship with en.WP and WN's foreign counterparts. On the former, it is a pity that there isn't more confluence between our front-page news items and WN; but I don't think it's appropriate to have that relationship until WN transforms itself.
All of these matters might be considered by a WMF review. One thing is certain: there is some kind of role for the Foundation to forge in an era of fast-declining business models for the traditional news and journlism organisations. I just don't think we've got it nearly right yet. Tony (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I noticed this amongst my scripts, but I have no idea what it is. Radiopathy •talk• 03:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I have posted a GA reassessment at Talk:Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China. Please feel free to comment. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I've replied at your comment. Thanks for bringing it to our attention! - Amgine ( talk) 04:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
It missed "center" here (the dif really isn't relevant because I caught it and did it manually). Radiopathy •talk• 19:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
your script to correct dates is a bit off, it appears: In
this diff you changed the ISO dates to dmy dates, but it seems the article originally had mostly mdy dates (and you also added the {{
mdy}} marker).
Cheers,
Amalthea 08:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Look at this! It actually looked this way in the article, too! Radiopathy •talk• 19:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments on Talk:History of Paraguay, and for taking the time to look into the changes that were in dispute. As a result of your comments, I think we are making progress on resolving this. Regards, Ground Zero | t 19:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked my oage for deletion. I think you said there were no references, and it was for self-promotion, but i think if you check the links again, you will see that all references to me are not user created. They are all links to oages that reference my work. allmusic, artistdirect, and discogs are sites that reference me that i had nothing to do with. (i.e. I cant change anything they write.) Also allmusic is used as the reference by the Grammy commitee to allow artists and executives to become voting members of the Grammys. I would ask that you recheck.
I placed another link on there referencing The North Carolina Project, and i also removed anything that cannot be referenced. This is not for my self promotion. i apologize if it appeared that way. Thanks! Superkat2 ( talk) 21:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Curious to know why you are delinking some places in airline destinations lists. 119.155.35.220 ( talk) 00:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I would also mention in passing that there were also instances where headers were linked viz: ==[[Asia]]==. Such links are discouraged, and should be removed as a matter of course. I hope that addresses your query. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
well, the main argument behind me adding it is the very fact that I added it. I mean - knowing how, in my mind, Dalai Lama's political views are often contrasted with those of the government of the PRC, I just found it... surprising to see that he's been classified as a Chinese person himself. And I believe that many other people may react similarly, too. So I added this template - perhaps there are others, more suitable for the situation, but it was the first idea I got - hoping that someone would clarify that statement by explaining whether it refers to his having a Chinese citizenship, to his ethnicity (though I guess there are no single "Chinese people"), or to some still else criterion.
Personally, I'd just say he's Tibetan. But again, that's just me, having no knowledge about him at all. So I hoped someone would help me in that.
Thanks, viny. tell // 19:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Hong Kong is up for FAC again at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hong Kong/archive4. It would be great if you could lend a helping hand with an outstanding issue regarding lead paragraph and too much blue links. Thanks! Ta-Va-Tar ( discuss– ?) 13:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, please add content to Yuan Tengfei, and I hope this time it wouldn't get deleted like before. Arilang talk 08:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, TRM pointed out this one (dates within quotes were altered, and flag icons messed with). Tony (talk) 17:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Gee, thanks! (Most appreciated!!) I see censorship and bullying are alive and well, and heartily supported by you. Pdfpdf ( talk) 16:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for copy-editing my rough English in the article Brigida Banti. I have made myself some further minor corrections, when necessary to make clearer the facts reported; and I wonder if you would be so kind as to edit two more corrections I don’t feel able to make myself.
1. As far as I can remember, Michael Kelly’s enthusiasm was raised by Banti’s performance as Euridice, which he chanced to attend, and not by her whole activity in Venice in the eighties;
2. "vulgar, impudent, dissolute and even a drunkard" are not the precise words written by Lorenzo Da Ponte and so they ought not to be put in inverted commas. Should you like to edit a correct precise quotation, here is Da Ponte’s text: “...she was an ignorant bad female, foolish and insolent, who, having been used from her early youth to singing around cafés and streets, took to the theatre, where only her voice led her, all habitudes, manners and morals of an impudent Corisca. Loose in her tongue, looser in her actions, addicted to guzzling, licentiousness and to the bottle, she would always appear as she actually was in front of everybody, she did not know any kind of moderation, she exercised no restraint; and when any of her passions was whetted by difficulties or opposition, she became an asp, a fury, a hell demon, that would be able to turn a whole empire topsy-turvy, not only a theatre ...” (for the Italian text, cf. here)
Finally, what about now removing the copy-edit template? Cheers Jeanambr ( talk) 21:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
P.S. I haven't the faintest idea about who Corisca is (maybe a then famous theatre character?)!
Thank you very much indeed again! Just a final remark: the text quotation seems to be lacking some words for an accomplished meaning. I can’t help thinking we’d better leave my original summarizing reference without inverted commas (reporting she had been vulgar, impudent, dissolute and even a drunkard) and contemporaneously report in the footnote Da Ponte’s whole text translated into English. Maybe it would be both easier and more helpful for English readers. Cheers. Jeanambr ( talk) 06:49, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you again. Cheers.-- Jeanambr ( talk) 07:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Btw: I have found out that Corisca is a villain, cunning and deceitful character of Il pastor fido, which should have been well-known to Da Ponte.
You are invited to join the
Committee for getting things done
Rich
Farmbrough, 18:30, 28 October 2010 (UTC).
I propose that the following be done for all 31 (did I count correctly?) provinces of mainland China: merge the contents of the templates "County-level divisions in Anhui" into "Template:Anhui" (比如说). This has already been done for at least Guangdong, as far as I know. And this is what is done on Chinese Wikipedia. Why have two templates when one, albeit very large, could suffice? -- H XL 何献龙 03:43, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you've been doing this in so many articles, but can you please be consistent. What is the point in de-linking some cities, and not others (eg: Korean Air? It is very tedious to go back and fix eg: here. Thanks, Jasepl ( talk) 04:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The Date delinking case is supplemented as follows:
Remedy #17 ("Ohconfucius automation") of the Date delinkingcase is terminated, effective immediately, and Ohconfucius ( talk · contribs) is permitted to use automation subject to normal community guidelines.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee Dougweller ( talk) 14:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
I have moved the draft of the Kilgour-Matas report to: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Kilgour-Matas report. I think a week there, then ask another admin to look it over before moving it into mainspace. Put it up at AfD to get a wider response. If it passes that test, trim the Falun Gong material in Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China and direct readers to the Kilgour-Matas article. SilkTork * YES! 11:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
You were right about at least some of it being copyvio. I noted a confirmed an example at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 10 and left a copyvio note for the original contributor. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Accademia Italiana Thailand, as the article was discussed at AfD in April 2009 and is therefore permanently ineligible for deletion via prod. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice against opening another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 17:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
please have a look at Talk:Boxer Rebellion, and offer your opinion when you have time. Arilang talk 04:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Skookum1 has claimed in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern California Chinatowns that we are friends (intimating Collusion). Although I would be honored to engage in a dialogue with you in the future, this needs to be refuted, as evidence of his lack of veracity. I am not Canvassing, I thought you should be kept informed. Namaste ... DocOfSoc ( talk) 10:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi
I’m bringing this to your talk page as, again, it’s one of your edits, and also you seem to have been given dispensation to use automated tools again. While the RfC on the wp:link talk page seems to have not really brought much light on the wider issue, there’s still some rather obvious problems with consistency in delinking. For example
this recent edit - as well as removing a link to “Melbourne” from the lead, which seems a little bizarre when the page is about a Melbourne suburb - takes out some of the links for the ethnic groups in the place. Now, you could make a case for removing them all - or alternatively for keeping them all, but making them to “people” or “diaspora” articles rather than piping them to country/region pages - but I really do not get on what basis you’ve selectively removed some, eg the link for Greeks but not for Arabs (and, left the latter as a rather odd piped link to “Arabia”). One can make a judgment one way or the other as to whether these are sufficiently relevant links - if they are, per wp:link, they should all be kept, whether “common” or not. Even if you want to quietly bypass that requirement, I can’t see any objective basis for making the distinction as to what is common and what is not as you have. Or even any subjective basis for it to be honest. It just seems utterly random. Overall, it’s not clear whether you’re still doing this sort of thing carelessly, or conversely because you’re trying to think too hard about what to leave in and what to take out. This isn’t the first time that I, or other people, have raised this kind of point in respect of some of your changes either.
N-HH
talk/
edits 14:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, while I’m here, a couple more examples - why have you removed a link to “Broadway Theatre”
here? And why did you remove the link to Ireland in the See Also section
here? Why have you removed a link to the Republican party from the lead
here? I'll tidy up/correct some of these, but as noted previously, why should I or anyone else have to, especially for those that can only be seen as outright errors?
The ENGVAR script is 'unwatching' pages that I run it on! Radiopathy •talk• 14:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
BTW, I've been informed elsewhere that the Mediawiki software occasionally drops watchlisted items. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 14:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Re your comment:
Well, that's been tried, only to see it all restored with complaints of "vandalism" but I fear the "keep" is going to encourage the original research-oriented editor to defy all comers, despite the adjudicating admin's comments about content objections being valid. "Analyse in detail" has been done, and all of the San Gabriel Valley section falls in the category of "SYNTH" and "OR" because none of the cites support that even Monterey Park IS a Chinatown, and not just an area with lots of Chinese commercial establishments and residents; if not even that city says it's that, it's not enough to cite figurative references as if those were conclusive/factual proof. Your Valley Corridor section that you deleted is, so far, still absent; but I wouldn't be surprised if it's put back in, likewise what I just took out...... Skookum1 ( talk) 21:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I was testing your EngvarB script for the first time on Humour and something surprising happened. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong but nothing was changed except those two instances of "surprise". Please help! Thank you. McLerristarr | Mclay1 05:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, I was wondering where I could find a complete list of the changes as I'm not particularly good at reading code. Thanks. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
One more thing, I recently created the page Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling)/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize" and I was wondering if you could tell me if I've missed any exceptions. Thanks. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I was in the process of creating a proper and comprehensive test page, but I got sidetracked. The closest I have to one is at the bottom of my script documentation here. More anon. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 06:18, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I tried it using Safari and it worked but it did not correct "humor" in the first sentence of Humour. It also wanted to add the EngvarB template even though it already had one. By the way, wouldn't it be best if it added {{ Use British English}} instead? That way it avoids the redirect that bots and AWB will waste time correcting and it may be of benefit to unaware editors. McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I hate to be a pain but it's correcting words in URLs and file names. Try it on Airplane! – it's a good one for testing. McLerristarr | Mclay1 03:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
After trying for the last hour or so, I haven't yet managed to cure the problem of the changes to 'image=airplane!.jpg'. I may have to go deeper into the code. I haven't yet tried to cure the problem of {{rottentomatoes|airplane}} although I'm tempted to say that latter one is probably better dealt with by capitalisation. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I think I've now resolved that particular issue, as well as instances within {{ sic}}, and as image parameters within infoboxes. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
You may wish to see this. I have no idea what it did, but apparently the script now removes non-existant musical notes. McLerristarr | Mclay1 15:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree on changing "aeroplane" and "airplane" to "aircraft". Aircraft is a much broader term that also includes zeppelins and the like. Fixed-wing aircraft is the compromise but that sounds awkward in general text, but so does just "aircraft". "They travelled by aircraft to America", "He caught an aircraft at noon" etc. If a page is written entirely in British English, I see no reason why "aeroplane" can't be used. McLerristarr | Mclay1 12:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, as mentioned in the Newsroom, an important item seems to have been overlooked in the Arbitration report. Will you be able to complete it within the next few hours? Regards, HaeB ( talk) 18:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I was using the Oxford script on The Hobbit and it wanted to covert a few words ending in "-ise" to "-ize" which should end in "-ise" in Oxford English. Is there a way around this problem? I noticed you mentioned it in the script documentation. If it's just a matter of listing all the exceptions, then Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling)/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize"#Words never ending with "-ize" maybe of some help, otherwise sorry for telling you about something you already know. McLerristarr | Mclay1 01:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I've created two more sub-categories: Category:All Wikipedia articles written in British English and Category:All Wikipedia articles written in British (Oxford) English. I've updated the templates and progress boxes. The categories do not have many items in them yet according to my Wikipedia, could be to do something to do with the cache or it could be Wikipedia being slow. Eventually though, every article tagged with one of the templates will be added to the respective category as well as the dated category. McLerristarr | Mclay1 05:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I think this change was undue. With reference to the related citation templates, I do not see why the publications titles would not be linked. For dates, "to avoid ambiguity, write out the month in words, using the same date format as in the main text of the article." What would be useeful would be to replace the date format in accessdate by the format in date (same concern in Charvet Place Vendôme). Could you do it with AWB? Cheers, Racconish Tk 07:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, would you please ensure that at least the first use of a term is correctly wikilinked on the various lists of windmills in European countries? Otherwise the reader might not be able to discover exactly what a moulin tour en bois or a beltmolen or Bockwindmühle is. Mjroots ( talk) 07:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
The British English script currently changes "cleanup" to "clean-up" in {{ Cleanup}} and as a parameter of {{ Multiple issues}}. Could this be avoided? McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just a few things I've discovered through using your great script. Currently, the Oxford script is incorrectly changing "arise" but is not changing "bastardise", "philosophise", "standardise" or "synthesise". Both scripts do not correct "aging" ("ageing"), "counterclockwise" ("anticlockwise" – make sure Oxford doesn't catch the ending), "breathalyze" ("breathalyse"), "cataloged" ("catalogued"), "cataloging" ("cataloguing"), "encyclopedia" ("encyclopaedia"), "encyclopedic" ("encyclopaedic" – but not in maintenance templates), "aerie" ("eyrie"), "gotten" ("got"), "licorice" ("liquorice"), "louver" ("louvre"), "math" ("maths"), "molt" ("moult"), "mollusk" ("mollusc"), "ocher" ("ochre"), "omelette" ("omelet"), "phony" ("phoney") and "specialty" ("speciality"). They're the main ones but not all of them. I've complied a (currently incomplete) list of British and American terms and spellings at User:Mclay1/Britishisms. It's useful for testing the scripts, although not all the list items can be corrected due to ambiguity. In some cases, an American spelling is more common in British English (e.g. "gramme"/"gram") or vice versa but in those cases I've only listed one spelling. Feel free to add to or correct the list if you want. McLerristarr | Mclay1 16:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
changing "arise" but is not changing "bastardise", "philosophise", "standardise" or "synthesise". Both scripts do not correct "aging" ("ageing"), "counterclockwise" ("anticlockwise" – make sure Oxford doesn't catch the ending), "breathalyze" ("breathalyse"), "cataloged" ("catalogued"), "cataloging" ("cataloguing"), "encyclopedia" ("encyclopaedia"), "encyclopedic" ("encyclopaedic" – but not in maintenance templates), "aerie" ("eyrie"), "gotten" ("got"), "licorice" ("liquorice"), "louver" ("louvre"), "math" ("maths"), "molt" ("moult"), "mollusk" ("mollusc"), "ocher" ("ochre"), "omelet" ("omelette"), "phony" ("phoney") and "specialty" ("speciality").
I figured that words like "math", "phony" and "gotten" are vernacular and likely to be used only in quotes, and conversion risks creating false positives; "Licorice" appears to be an acceptable British spelling, so I will not treat this. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 17:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just a query as to why you removed the wiki link to actor in this article. Would you let me know please as I regularly keep it up to date. Thanks Scrabble1968 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC).
A semi-fair response. I indeed should not be untowardly bitter towards you. I will change my tone, and now do offer my apologies for the above [on that page, where this was originally written], apparent rudeness. I stand by my assertion that the move to have the original page deleted was wrong, however. I won't say it was scurrilous. But I will say that I believe it was wrong, and I hope it will be fixed. More evidence on the topic has come out since then, and more continues to come to light. We will see a full explanation of the ghastly subject on Wikipedia, of that I am confident. Your problem has always been the misconception that information that incriminates the CCP is not neutral, simply because it incriminates the CCP and effectively validates Falun Gong's complaints. This is the wrong way to understand NPOV. Scholars should just follow the evidence, evaluate it impartially, and follow it to where it leads. Scholars should not suppress information that does not fit a precast notion of "neutrality," where because Falun Gong says 'A' and the CCP says 'Z', the truth must be 'M'. That isn't the meaning of neutrality. And we've seen vast attempts at information suppression based on just that principle. This single point is a large part of my frustration with my experience here, and part of the reason I took a long break after the unfair ban. I have not forgotten that you did not support my being banned, and for that and other reasons respect you. I don't intend to stick around for much longer. Some other editors did a pretty good job of cleaning up the massive mess the Falun Gong page was in (see TheSoundAndTheFury's extensive forensics in the archive; quite impressive), and now I just want to fine tune a number of points, revisit the persecution page, the overseas page, and possibly the organ harvesting page. That sounds like a lot, but I hope it will only take a few months. -- Asdfg 12345 05:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
You might have a point with what you say above. If you follow what I do, you will know that I am not adverse to seeing criticism of the CCP. I do understand that A may be correct from some people's perspective and Z may be correct from others'. The M½ you refer to might be yet another's point of view, yet it could turn out to be a horrible comprise that can never be truthful and that pleases no-one.
I feel much happier these last few months without going anywhere near a FLG article; in fact, even though I watchlisted several potential targets, I would always anxiously hope I would not come across any of the 'usual suspects' (from either side) in the course of editing; I would feel trepidation whenever I saw the name of one appear in the article history. It won't be long before I took those articles off my list. Now that the K&M Report article has survived AfD, I shall make a point to avoid it too. I hope you find your joy in the after-Wikilife. My consolation is that Wikipedia holds many other areas of interest for me that get my adrenaline flowing but do not significantly add to my blood pressure. Hasta la vista! -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 14:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius,
I was going to notify you of this discussion regarding some inaccuracies in this week's "In the news" that had been introduced in one of your edits. I see you already became aware of it and I commend your response there. I have started a general discussion about such issues, which you are welcome to join.
Thanks for taking up the responsibility to cover the Arbitration report, it is appreciated, and after the earlier problems I was generally very pleased to see your constructive contributions to the last two issues of the Signpost. However, as I said on IRC at the time, I can't spare you a concluding public response to this, repeating that your edit-wars here and here were absolutely not acceptable, not only considering your own COI at the time and a notion regarding original reporting that directly contradicted Wikipedia:Signpost/About, but also because even more so than in mainspace articles, edit-wars are especially destructive in Signpost stories when publication time is near or overdue (like in the second example, where the story had already been up for 38 hours without any objections by others). I hope that such problems won't repeat, and our discussions in reaching that compromise as well as your recent constructive contributions give me some confidence about this.
Regards, HaeB ( talk) 09:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
My apologies for the offense caused and for assuming bad faith on your part. The comment was not meant as a personal attack but a questioning of your motives as a fellow opponent of political censorship. I hope to bury the hatchet and move along.-- William S. Saturn ( talk) 05:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I originally (maybe improperly) posted this question on User talk:Ohconfucius/EngvarB but didn't receive an answer. Instead of adding {{ EngvarB}} or {{ EngvarOx}}, should the script add {{ Use British English}} or {{ Use British (Oxford) English}} instead to avoid template redirects? GoingBatty ( talk) 03:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
This user is a native of Hong Kong. |
This user is a citizen of the United Kingdom. |
This user lives in France. |
...
Ampersand
Add this to your user page by typing in {{Styletips}} |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. Noticed you referring to WP:MOSNUM in your edit summary when converting ISO dates to another format. Please would you only change ISO dates to one of the formats acceptable at WP:MOSNUM#Full date formatting, rather than the 30 Jan., 2009 you used at Ashley Young. In the case of Mr Young, a British sportsperson, that would be the international format 30 January 2009, i.e. month written out in full and no punctuation. Thanks, Struway2 ( talk) 07:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I forgot about that. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 17:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
G'day! Just a quick note: it appears that your script does not recognise "urbanized" when converting to the -ise spelling. Would you be able to correct this? Cheers, Hayden120 ( talk) 11:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Will try to do this, bit busy just now. Rich Farmbrough, 19:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC).
I thought the convention was that years exceeding 4 digits, like numbers exceeding 3 digits, retained commas. If I'm wrong, or if there's a WP:MOSDATE clause to the contrary, I apologize. I partially reverted your edit at Year 2038 problem. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion I suggest that you make the script ignore text within category names to keep this from happening (scroll to the bottom, of course.) — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 15:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't really appreciate this. Tony was the one attacking, making snide comments that had nothing to do with the subject, [1] making false accusations, [2] and digging up the dirt. [3] Like the first snide comment, that had nothing to do with the subject and all of those were devoid of fact. -- AussieLegend ( talk) 04:23, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
It's true that Koavf and I have had some bloody wretched disagreements in the past. I, however, have determined to get on with the business of building an encyclopædia and purposefully avoid conflict. I no longer keep an eye on his contribs (he still watches mine), but our paths cross at times, and there are some editing patterns that I still feel the need to comment on. I prefer to not have conflict, and hopefully time will take care of that. Radiopathy •talk• 02:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Please have a look when you have time. Maybe you can suggest a better name for it.
Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition
Arilang talk 13:14, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost have decide that you should not be able to read commentary on the problems with censorship. This is the first time commentary has been censored from the Wikipedia Signpost, however, evidently, speaking out against Jimbo Wales' actions in the recent Commons debacle is too controversial.
Since I started editing Wikipedia, I've created literally hundreds of Featured pictures, a dozen or so Featured articles, a couple Featured portals, a featured list, and various other things.
What has my reward been?
I've been harassed, bullied, and generally treated like dirt. An arbcom case was opened by Charles Matthews, then a sitting arbitrator, to punish me for not immediately agreeing to his request to reconsider a block, with no additional information than "I think it's a good idea". I instead sought opinions on ANI, and so Charles Matthews got his friends in the Arbcom to harass me for three months. After two months, they decided that they really should have sought other means of dispute resolution, and opened an RfC... which came out firmly in my decfense. This wasn't what they wanted, so they ignored it, attacked those who spoke out against me, and did what they wanted
It took a year for the Arbcom to finally agree to withdraw the case, replacing it with an apology, and detailing the many procedural and ethical lapses.
More recently, I've been blocked for having an arbcom statement slightly over the limit - while I was in the middle of a lengthy rewrite. The other user I was in dispute with also had a statement over the limit throughout that time... and was never so much as warned.
Wikipedia treats its users like shit, but, ironically, only the long-time experienced users. If you ever begin to become jaded, your upset at Wikipedia will be used to implement more injustices.
Here we see an example. At the start of the news cycle, I wrote an editorial, following the Signpost's stated guideance for such. When it was done, I was told that they no longer publish editorials, and, instead of raising a fuss, I offered to simply publish it as a comment to stories, and the thread discussing it was closed.
Two hours before publication, the editor of the Signpost deleted the comment, without telling anyone. I objected; he had participated in the discussion, and the discussion had been closed for nearly a week, with the comment ready for publication throughout that time. I had dropped my insistence on publication of editorials, or any attempt to revise the article into a non-editorial overview, based on what I had seen as the agreement.
Now, not only is talking about censorship censored, but even a private complaint about at the [ http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3AWikipedia_Signpost%2FNewsroom&action=historysubmit&diff=375694073&oldid=375693486 editor making grossly inaccurate personal attacks against me, based on patently false allegations, has been censored.
I quit. Both the Signpost, and Wikipedia.
Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I've started a discussion here that you may be interested in. Radiopathy •talk• 16:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
This user is the proud winner of a Silliest wikilink of the month award. |
It makes the changes and tags the article, but I don't get the "difs" so that I can see what changes took place and edit if necessary. Radiopathy •talk• 01:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi!!!
I was looking at your script and I think you could simplify it a lot if you use an array to store the "substitution rules". I did this in another script I use at pt.wikisource for OCR corrections and it seems that the same principle apply here. You could use something like this for the rules:
var table = {
'aluminum': '$1aluminium',
'artifact': '$1artefact',
...
};
and then do a loop through it:
for (var word in table) {
regex_function1(word, tableword]);
}
The regex_function1
would be created with the code which is currently used explicitly in each row of your code. For example:
function regex_function1(w1, w2) {
var regex1 = new RegExp('([^\\w\\d\\-\\/])' + w1, 'g')
txt.value=txt.value.replace(regex1, w2);
}
What do you think?
By the way, did you notice my previous comment?
Have a nice week! Helder 13:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(<.+?>[^<]+?)
, ([^<]+?<\/.+?>)
, (\[Category:[^\]]*?)
, etc... (which appears in lots of lines) to outside your table and put it only inside a loop (or a function). This could make the code more understandable and easy to update... =) (note that I did this for ([^\\w\\d\\-\\/])
in the example above). This is another reason why I use more than one table...
Helder 21:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)It missed "color" here and "flavored" here. Radiopathy •talk• 02:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Rye Toe! I tried it on Flavored liquor (I didn't save it, of course) and it got every instance. Radiopathy •talk• 04:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't get it to do Mother's Little Helper again, but it worked great on 'lemon-flavored' at Lemonade. Radiopathy •talk• 04:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, I would like to invite you to a discussion on setting up good guidelines for tennis player notability. Please feel free to give comments and suggestions there. Thank you. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 09:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a note that editing other users' comments (as you did here) is inappropriate, per WP:TALKO - it's always assumed that editors have written their own comments, and by adding a "weasel words" tag into someone else's sentence, it makes it look as if the original author must have added it themselves. If you want to pick up on a particular phrase, just mention it in your response. I've removed the tag, I'll leave you to re-edit your last comment however you like, in light of this. Thanks. -- McGeddon ( talk) 09:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
As you've previously commented on this topic, your attention and participation is invited here: Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost#Ncmvocalist_needs_to_step_down_or_be_replaced — Rlevse • Talk • 23:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Ohconfucius! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 3 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 940 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{ unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 10:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You seem to be running some kind of script to clean up articles, such as Gregorian calendar. Please take care that the script does not introduce citation templates in articles that do not use them, and that it does not unlink significant years. Jc3s5h ( talk) 16:53, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
though note that templates should not be added without consensus to an article that already uses a consistent referencing style.
Because templates can be contentious, editors should not change an article with a distinctive citation format to another without gaining consensus. Where no agreement can be reached, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.
Just a quick note to point out that on this article, which I wrote, when you were properly fixing some MOSNUM problems, you also changed the wording of a couple of direct quotes to bring them into compliance with MOSNUM. Obviously, the wording of a direct quote should never be changed - since they were blockquotes, I figure you probably didn't notice they were quotes at the time, which is understandable. Still, I'm bringing it to your attention (even though your edit was almost two months ago -- I just noticed the mistake now) so you'll be sensitized to the problem in the future. Best, Beyond My Ken ( talk) 01:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, what's your intention with
Category:Use British English? It is categorized as a cleanup category (i.e. category of pages that have some kind of a problem that should be fixed), but from the descriptions it seems to me that it should just list articles written in British English. Also, it says that {{
EngvarB}}
will add an article to that category, but that's not the the case (at least currently).
Svick (
talk) 08:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I've just created Category:Use dmy dates -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Looks like he's reverted your 3RR warning to him. His contribution and user talk page history suggests he's been a problem editor in the past, so he bears watching, I think. Strange Passerby ( talk) 06:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 15:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, the semi-protected for Hong Kong expires in 20 September 2010, I feel like we should take this opportunity to push the article to FA status without vandalism interferences. I started cleaning up the History section since that was a section where we received large amount of negative remarks on. I thought about requesting a copy-editor to take quick look at it too, since I'm concern about WP:FA Criteria 1a. Thanks, Ta-Va-Tar ( discuss– what?) 03:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to know why you reverted my edits in the article. --FDJoshua22 11:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Next time remember to notify the uploader when you tag something for speedy-deletion. I've started a discussion thread on this page. -- Der yck C. 12:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi!!!
How is everything?
You probably will like to know that at fr.wikisource they have a script (fr:s:
oldwikisource:MediaWiki:Modernisation.js) which is used for modernization of texts written in old dialects. The script allow the reader to click in a menu in the sidebar to see the modernized version of text, based on a table of "old word" : "new word" pairs available at
fr:s:Wikisource:Dictionnaire.
You can test it acessing, for example, the page fr:s:La Cigale et la Fourmi and clicking at "Texte modernisé" in the sidebar (then the text of the page will change accordingly to the dictionary - but since there is an image in the beginning of the page, it may be a good idea to see the page in full screen mode to notice the changes happening ;-) ).
I found this when I proposed a similar feature (from MediaWiki) at multilingual wikisource: Using LanguageConverter syntax at Wikisources.
Best regards =) Helder 22:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks a lot for agreeing to help with this! I'm starting EdwardsBot weekly as part of the Signpost publication process and the global bot's syntax seems to be basically the same, so I don't mind much if the process is 17 instead of 16 steps. But it would still save me time if you could do it.
One thing that should be worked out beforehand is the delivery format. I would suggest the same that we have been using for EdwardsBot so far ( example - a content list with a link to each story). Until interwiki transclusion becomes reality, the template that EdwardsBot uses here can't be used on other wikis. I've been working out how to extend Pretzels' Signpost template system by other display options (for other Signpost delivery formats such the RSS feed or mailing list announcements, but this should work as well). That would mean one would have a page here on en: with ready-made text (automatically updated as soon as the new issue comes out) for copying+pasting into the spam page on Meta.
Regards, HaeB ( talk) 05:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello Ohconfucius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tennessee Technology Center at Shelbyville, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 doesn't apply to schools, and it's not overly spammy. . Thank you. Ged UK 13:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am seeking to have someone explain the civility policy to User:Surturz here. Tony (talk) 16:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I've undone this change. "Earth" is a proper noun, so would be capitalised whether it was in a title or not; changing the redirect broke links such as the one in the lede of abiogenesis, which use life on Earth (note the lack of initial capital). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 12:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
I see on my talk page that you nominated this article for deletion at 03:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC). It was then promptly deleted by user Kimchi.sg at 04:03, 9 September 2010. Since the article and its talk page are already deleted, it is not possible to contest the tagging as you suggested. So, what can be done to protest this undiscussed deletion? I wrote a message to Kimchi, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kimchi.sg#Regarding_protesting_the_deletion_of_.22Giorgi_Latsabidze.22, questioning this procedure and attempting to start a discussion. As I explained to him, I started this article last year, and it has been edited several times since then and numerous elements have been added. Some of these may be legitimately objectionable, but I cannot investigate this possibility since the current article is not accessible. So what do you suggest I do now? Music43lover ( talk) 20:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Fwiw, I hope you have read Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars (WP:DTTR) before performing such silly stunts again because ANI is not a good place for you to be. This is my advice for you. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:26, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Per WP:BRD, please state your opinion there above, rather to be a contentious editor yourself, when all I have done is 1 RR (Lambanog has stuck to WP:1RR so you should back off and mind your own business) prior to you wrongfully warning me for 3 RR. As I've mentioned above, knock it off before I take you to WP:ANI for this wrongful accusation. Take heed. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I've removed your request for another third opinion. I'm still active on the page and will continue to provide assistance. If you feel that my opinion is insufficient, though, consider WP:RFC. I've given 3Os for quite some time now, though, and hopefully I can help mediate this out. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for giving my contribution a haircut. I wasn't sure if there was a guideline on length. Is there? (Regardless, you improved my text anyway). hamiltonstone ( talk) 03:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
There will be a gathering in Hong Kong this weekend ( Wikipedia:Meetup/Hong_Kong_51) to commemorate the 5th anniversary of the Hong Kong Wikimedian community. Come along - I really hope a few more English Wikipedians will be there, and it'll be a good time to meet up and talk about things. -- Der yck C. 07:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Paris is linked in the tables in French Chess Championship because every city is linked in that column. Appearance and consistency are important in a table, and linking Paris is not distracting here. In fact, not linking Paris is a distraction because of the unnecessary difference in appearance for those entries. Quale ( talk) 03:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
You are correct in this case, in my opinion.
Paris is as well known as anything can be, particularly in this context.
The sea of Paris makes it that much harder to see the non-Paris cases, which often are places the average person has never heard of.
Consider restoring that link to Toulouse to show the contrast.
Good luck,
Varlaam (
talk) 04:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
• <--See this dot? That's the good luck barnstar, the tasteful, less ostentatious edition.
You may want to (if you haven't already) raid my monobook.js search for the confusingly named ==Spelling - did muck with header levels - now date formats per new MoS==. It is not bomb-proof and the older stuff elsewhere (years old) I'm sure is not as good as what you got from Lightmouse. Rich Farmbrough, 06:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC).
I've undone your redirect of List of books portraying paedophilia or sexual abuse of minors to WP:CHILDPROTECT. I'll be asking at ANI for help fixing the talk page, so consider this a notification of that as well. Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
These scripts are great, and as you are doing, I wouldn't hand these to just anybody you might even consider setting them up like AWB where you need approval before using them. One thing I see that could be rearranged is the Date script has a edit notice of [[WP:MOSNUM|unified date formats]], rem [[wp:overlink]] which I have yet to use Both scripts on the same article and the overlink script has no edit summary at all. each script needs it's own edit summary. As far as performance I did need to go to my .js page once so far and re-bypass my cache. Otherwise I love these scripts and again thanx for the hook up :P. Mlpearc powwow 15:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Mlpearc powwow 15:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Also I just noticed, is there a way to set the overlinking script to NOT, or give the option to not look at the infobox ? There's a lot of pages that could use a little overlinking clean up but, In most cases you would not want to de-link the infobox. Mlpearc powwow 14:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I removed your personal attack from my talk page, but I wanted to respond here to some of the factual claims within it.
1. "he seeks a way of giving it de facto permanence" - this is false. I seek broad community consensus for whatever we end up doing, and I support an orderly process of discussion and revision in the pursuit of that consensus. This is the Wikipedia way. I am unwilling to impose the will of the majority (which is strongly in support of Pending Changes) by fiat.
2. Your claims that I am trying to "save face" by imposing PC through some "unilateral" "dictat" is completely at odds with the facts.-- Jimbo Wales ( talk) 14:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Fancine, as the article has been at AfD before and therefore cannot be deleted via prod. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice to opening another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 20:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:ISO. Since you had some involvement with the Template:ISO redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bridgeplayer ( talk) 10:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
A GA Review of Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China is taking place, and the question of splitting out the section Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China#Falun Gong allegations: 2006 into a standalone article has been raised. This will be a controversial move as there are people who have objected to the allegation and corresponding report being a standalone article, and have insisted on merging it back into Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China. I support the content being moved into a standalone article, with a summary left behind, as currently this one allegation dominates the article. Added to which the allegation and the report have gained enough media attention to meet notability guidelines. My proposal is to create the article Kilgour-Matas report, leaving a summary behind, and to immediately open a discussion on WP:AfD regarding the notability of the topic. The version I would use is this one, and to update it with pertinent amendments made to Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China, using the images that are in that article. Your comments, suggestions, and involvement in this is welcomed and encouraged. SilkTork * YES! 14:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Just curious as to whether you see any existing concerns on the content relevant to the subject right now. John Carter ( talk) 17:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I've left you a message on Wikinews - Amgine ( talk) 02:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi!
I think you may like to test this script (together with this css). The script will add a menu at the top of pages and let you change the spellings from/to Britsh/American English based in lists of words (which currently are at Dictionary/en-US and /en-GB), editable by anyone.
You can see what happens in the dictionary pages, for example, or accessing articles where there are words in the lists (like Belgium and others). I don't know much of English, so the tables were just an adaptation of this table and may need revision by native English speakers ;-) Helder 16:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping up the drumbeat for sanity in linking to "in the news" Wikinews articles. It will take long time to get this changed, but we may see something changed if we keep it up! We have lots of supporters. Alas, so do they! :) Student7 ( talk) 12:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
What exactly do you have against Wikinews? or are you just crying out loud because no one cared there about your "proposed changes"? Nice vendetta. -- Diego Grez ( talk) 02:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Help WN by linking to its rehashes of the original news sources? No, that certainly should not be done, Diego. The model for WN was always fatally flawed: to rehash the main stories coming out of the big ones on the net. There are at least three problems:
I have received an email from a WN regular saying how appalled they are at the way I have been treated. Actually, I feel lucky compared with one person, who left only a few months ago after being treated dreadfully (look at the edit-summary), and here (straight after a death in the family), or someone else, who has left in disgust after a bout of abuse: no, the email was from a current regular at WN who would not dare to speak out on-wiki.
But I see that McNeil will escape without having to answer calls by several editors, some established, to justify his actions and behaviour. Thus, his behaviour will continue. It is dysfunctional to an extreme point, and needs to be addressed by the Foundation. You have a hide coming here and whining about why WP doesn't link to WN. I would prefer to discuss with you and others there how WN's model can be changed to enable it to survive.
Before you lurch into the same old anti-en.WP resentment fest that McNeil has sucked you and others there into, please remember that I came there as a friend, to help in what I am expert at: language, style guides, and the framing of advice to professionals. It's my RL job, as well as a pursuit on en.WP. You continue to support a corrupt power regime in which one bureaucrat acts against the most basic rules, including heavily "involved" actions and rank rudeness, insults, and bullying; and the other then stops discussion of it by freezing the ~ANI page. The advice of the steward is ingored. I see that McNeil will escape without having to answer calls by several editors, some established, to justify his actions and behaviour. Thus, his behaviour will continue. It is dysfunctional to an extreme point, and needs to be addressed by the Foundation. You have a hide coming here and whining about why WP doesn't link to WN. I would prefer to discuss with you and others there how WN's model can be changed to enable it to survive than to deal with your support of the status quo. Tony (talk) 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
What also exercises my mind is how to increase the readership. It might be heresy on my part (?), but I think they should consider (1) deadlined publications, less frequent, since they have much larger impact and are an easier way to gain "branding" (branding is what WP has ... it's what WN conspicuously lacks). And (2) a careful mix of op eds—really well-written, interesting ones.
These are just off-the-cuff thoughts that have been rootling around in my mind for a week. Perhaps a combination of both specific-time publications and a continuous, ongoing "breaking news" section that is updated regularly. Unsure.
What WN desperately needs as well is more editors, an open culture, and a smoother relationship with en.WP and WN's foreign counterparts. On the former, it is a pity that there isn't more confluence between our front-page news items and WN; but I don't think it's appropriate to have that relationship until WN transforms itself.
All of these matters might be considered by a WMF review. One thing is certain: there is some kind of role for the Foundation to forge in an era of fast-declining business models for the traditional news and journlism organisations. I just don't think we've got it nearly right yet. Tony (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I noticed this amongst my scripts, but I have no idea what it is. Radiopathy •talk• 03:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I have posted a GA reassessment at Talk:Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China. Please feel free to comment. Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I've replied at your comment. Thanks for bringing it to our attention! - Amgine ( talk) 04:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
It missed "center" here (the dif really isn't relevant because I caught it and did it manually). Radiopathy •talk• 19:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
your script to correct dates is a bit off, it appears: In
this diff you changed the ISO dates to dmy dates, but it seems the article originally had mostly mdy dates (and you also added the {{
mdy}} marker).
Cheers,
Amalthea 08:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Look at this! It actually looked this way in the article, too! Radiopathy •talk• 19:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments on Talk:History of Paraguay, and for taking the time to look into the changes that were in dispute. As a result of your comments, I think we are making progress on resolving this. Regards, Ground Zero | t 19:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked my oage for deletion. I think you said there were no references, and it was for self-promotion, but i think if you check the links again, you will see that all references to me are not user created. They are all links to oages that reference my work. allmusic, artistdirect, and discogs are sites that reference me that i had nothing to do with. (i.e. I cant change anything they write.) Also allmusic is used as the reference by the Grammy commitee to allow artists and executives to become voting members of the Grammys. I would ask that you recheck.
I placed another link on there referencing The North Carolina Project, and i also removed anything that cannot be referenced. This is not for my self promotion. i apologize if it appeared that way. Thanks! Superkat2 ( talk) 21:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Curious to know why you are delinking some places in airline destinations lists. 119.155.35.220 ( talk) 00:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I would also mention in passing that there were also instances where headers were linked viz: ==[[Asia]]==. Such links are discouraged, and should be removed as a matter of course. I hope that addresses your query. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
well, the main argument behind me adding it is the very fact that I added it. I mean - knowing how, in my mind, Dalai Lama's political views are often contrasted with those of the government of the PRC, I just found it... surprising to see that he's been classified as a Chinese person himself. And I believe that many other people may react similarly, too. So I added this template - perhaps there are others, more suitable for the situation, but it was the first idea I got - hoping that someone would clarify that statement by explaining whether it refers to his having a Chinese citizenship, to his ethnicity (though I guess there are no single "Chinese people"), or to some still else criterion.
Personally, I'd just say he's Tibetan. But again, that's just me, having no knowledge about him at all. So I hoped someone would help me in that.
Thanks, viny. tell // 19:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius, I'm not sure if you noticed, but Hong Kong is up for FAC again at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hong Kong/archive4. It would be great if you could lend a helping hand with an outstanding issue regarding lead paragraph and too much blue links. Thanks! Ta-Va-Tar ( discuss– ?) 13:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, please add content to Yuan Tengfei, and I hope this time it wouldn't get deleted like before. Arilang talk 08:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, TRM pointed out this one (dates within quotes were altered, and flag icons messed with). Tony (talk) 17:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Gee, thanks! (Most appreciated!!) I see censorship and bullying are alive and well, and heartily supported by you. Pdfpdf ( talk) 16:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for copy-editing my rough English in the article Brigida Banti. I have made myself some further minor corrections, when necessary to make clearer the facts reported; and I wonder if you would be so kind as to edit two more corrections I don’t feel able to make myself.
1. As far as I can remember, Michael Kelly’s enthusiasm was raised by Banti’s performance as Euridice, which he chanced to attend, and not by her whole activity in Venice in the eighties;
2. "vulgar, impudent, dissolute and even a drunkard" are not the precise words written by Lorenzo Da Ponte and so they ought not to be put in inverted commas. Should you like to edit a correct precise quotation, here is Da Ponte’s text: “...she was an ignorant bad female, foolish and insolent, who, having been used from her early youth to singing around cafés and streets, took to the theatre, where only her voice led her, all habitudes, manners and morals of an impudent Corisca. Loose in her tongue, looser in her actions, addicted to guzzling, licentiousness and to the bottle, she would always appear as she actually was in front of everybody, she did not know any kind of moderation, she exercised no restraint; and when any of her passions was whetted by difficulties or opposition, she became an asp, a fury, a hell demon, that would be able to turn a whole empire topsy-turvy, not only a theatre ...” (for the Italian text, cf. here)
Finally, what about now removing the copy-edit template? Cheers Jeanambr ( talk) 21:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
P.S. I haven't the faintest idea about who Corisca is (maybe a then famous theatre character?)!
Thank you very much indeed again! Just a final remark: the text quotation seems to be lacking some words for an accomplished meaning. I can’t help thinking we’d better leave my original summarizing reference without inverted commas (reporting she had been vulgar, impudent, dissolute and even a drunkard) and contemporaneously report in the footnote Da Ponte’s whole text translated into English. Maybe it would be both easier and more helpful for English readers. Cheers. Jeanambr ( talk) 06:49, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you again. Cheers.-- Jeanambr ( talk) 07:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Btw: I have found out that Corisca is a villain, cunning and deceitful character of Il pastor fido, which should have been well-known to Da Ponte.
You are invited to join the
Committee for getting things done
Rich
Farmbrough, 18:30, 28 October 2010 (UTC).
I propose that the following be done for all 31 (did I count correctly?) provinces of mainland China: merge the contents of the templates "County-level divisions in Anhui" into "Template:Anhui" (比如说). This has already been done for at least Guangdong, as far as I know. And this is what is done on Chinese Wikipedia. Why have two templates when one, albeit very large, could suffice? -- H XL 何献龙 03:43, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you've been doing this in so many articles, but can you please be consistent. What is the point in de-linking some cities, and not others (eg: Korean Air? It is very tedious to go back and fix eg: here. Thanks, Jasepl ( talk) 04:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The Date delinking case is supplemented as follows:
Remedy #17 ("Ohconfucius automation") of the Date delinkingcase is terminated, effective immediately, and Ohconfucius ( talk · contribs) is permitted to use automation subject to normal community guidelines.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee Dougweller ( talk) 14:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
I have moved the draft of the Kilgour-Matas report to: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Kilgour-Matas report. I think a week there, then ask another admin to look it over before moving it into mainspace. Put it up at AfD to get a wider response. If it passes that test, trim the Falun Gong material in Organ transplantation in the People's Republic of China and direct readers to the Kilgour-Matas article. SilkTork * YES! 11:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
You were right about at least some of it being copyvio. I noted a confirmed an example at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 10 and left a copyvio note for the original contributor. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I have removed the prod tag you placed on Accademia Italiana Thailand, as the article was discussed at AfD in April 2009 and is therefore permanently ineligible for deletion via prod. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice against opening another AfD. — KuyaBriBri Talk 17:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
please have a look at Talk:Boxer Rebellion, and offer your opinion when you have time. Arilang talk 04:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Skookum1 has claimed in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern California Chinatowns that we are friends (intimating Collusion). Although I would be honored to engage in a dialogue with you in the future, this needs to be refuted, as evidence of his lack of veracity. I am not Canvassing, I thought you should be kept informed. Namaste ... DocOfSoc ( talk) 10:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi
I’m bringing this to your talk page as, again, it’s one of your edits, and also you seem to have been given dispensation to use automated tools again. While the RfC on the wp:link talk page seems to have not really brought much light on the wider issue, there’s still some rather obvious problems with consistency in delinking. For example
this recent edit - as well as removing a link to “Melbourne” from the lead, which seems a little bizarre when the page is about a Melbourne suburb - takes out some of the links for the ethnic groups in the place. Now, you could make a case for removing them all - or alternatively for keeping them all, but making them to “people” or “diaspora” articles rather than piping them to country/region pages - but I really do not get on what basis you’ve selectively removed some, eg the link for Greeks but not for Arabs (and, left the latter as a rather odd piped link to “Arabia”). One can make a judgment one way or the other as to whether these are sufficiently relevant links - if they are, per wp:link, they should all be kept, whether “common” or not. Even if you want to quietly bypass that requirement, I can’t see any objective basis for making the distinction as to what is common and what is not as you have. Or even any subjective basis for it to be honest. It just seems utterly random. Overall, it’s not clear whether you’re still doing this sort of thing carelessly, or conversely because you’re trying to think too hard about what to leave in and what to take out. This isn’t the first time that I, or other people, have raised this kind of point in respect of some of your changes either.
N-HH
talk/
edits 14:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, while I’m here, a couple more examples - why have you removed a link to “Broadway Theatre”
here? And why did you remove the link to Ireland in the See Also section
here? Why have you removed a link to the Republican party from the lead
here? I'll tidy up/correct some of these, but as noted previously, why should I or anyone else have to, especially for those that can only be seen as outright errors?
The ENGVAR script is 'unwatching' pages that I run it on! Radiopathy •talk• 14:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
BTW, I've been informed elsewhere that the Mediawiki software occasionally drops watchlisted items. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 14:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Re your comment:
Well, that's been tried, only to see it all restored with complaints of "vandalism" but I fear the "keep" is going to encourage the original research-oriented editor to defy all comers, despite the adjudicating admin's comments about content objections being valid. "Analyse in detail" has been done, and all of the San Gabriel Valley section falls in the category of "SYNTH" and "OR" because none of the cites support that even Monterey Park IS a Chinatown, and not just an area with lots of Chinese commercial establishments and residents; if not even that city says it's that, it's not enough to cite figurative references as if those were conclusive/factual proof. Your Valley Corridor section that you deleted is, so far, still absent; but I wouldn't be surprised if it's put back in, likewise what I just took out...... Skookum1 ( talk) 21:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I was testing your EngvarB script for the first time on Humour and something surprising happened. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong but nothing was changed except those two instances of "surprise". Please help! Thank you. McLerristarr | Mclay1 05:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, I was wondering where I could find a complete list of the changes as I'm not particularly good at reading code. Thanks. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
One more thing, I recently created the page Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling)/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize" and I was wondering if you could tell me if I've missed any exceptions. Thanks. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I was in the process of creating a proper and comprehensive test page, but I got sidetracked. The closest I have to one is at the bottom of my script documentation here. More anon. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 06:18, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I tried it using Safari and it worked but it did not correct "humor" in the first sentence of Humour. It also wanted to add the EngvarB template even though it already had one. By the way, wouldn't it be best if it added {{ Use British English}} instead? That way it avoids the redirect that bots and AWB will waste time correcting and it may be of benefit to unaware editors. McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I hate to be a pain but it's correcting words in URLs and file names. Try it on Airplane! – it's a good one for testing. McLerristarr | Mclay1 03:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
After trying for the last hour or so, I haven't yet managed to cure the problem of the changes to 'image=airplane!.jpg'. I may have to go deeper into the code. I haven't yet tried to cure the problem of {{rottentomatoes|airplane}} although I'm tempted to say that latter one is probably better dealt with by capitalisation. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I think I've now resolved that particular issue, as well as instances within {{ sic}}, and as image parameters within infoboxes. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
You may wish to see this. I have no idea what it did, but apparently the script now removes non-existant musical notes. McLerristarr | Mclay1 15:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure I agree on changing "aeroplane" and "airplane" to "aircraft". Aircraft is a much broader term that also includes zeppelins and the like. Fixed-wing aircraft is the compromise but that sounds awkward in general text, but so does just "aircraft". "They travelled by aircraft to America", "He caught an aircraft at noon" etc. If a page is written entirely in British English, I see no reason why "aeroplane" can't be used. McLerristarr | Mclay1 12:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, as mentioned in the Newsroom, an important item seems to have been overlooked in the Arbitration report. Will you be able to complete it within the next few hours? Regards, HaeB ( talk) 18:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I was using the Oxford script on The Hobbit and it wanted to covert a few words ending in "-ise" to "-ize" which should end in "-ise" in Oxford English. Is there a way around this problem? I noticed you mentioned it in the script documentation. If it's just a matter of listing all the exceptions, then Wikipedia:Manual of Style (spelling)/Words ending with "-ise" or "-ize"#Words never ending with "-ize" maybe of some help, otherwise sorry for telling you about something you already know. McLerristarr | Mclay1 01:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I've created two more sub-categories: Category:All Wikipedia articles written in British English and Category:All Wikipedia articles written in British (Oxford) English. I've updated the templates and progress boxes. The categories do not have many items in them yet according to my Wikipedia, could be to do something to do with the cache or it could be Wikipedia being slow. Eventually though, every article tagged with one of the templates will be added to the respective category as well as the dated category. McLerristarr | Mclay1 05:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I think this change was undue. With reference to the related citation templates, I do not see why the publications titles would not be linked. For dates, "to avoid ambiguity, write out the month in words, using the same date format as in the main text of the article." What would be useeful would be to replace the date format in accessdate by the format in date (same concern in Charvet Place Vendôme). Could you do it with AWB? Cheers, Racconish Tk 07:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, would you please ensure that at least the first use of a term is correctly wikilinked on the various lists of windmills in European countries? Otherwise the reader might not be able to discover exactly what a moulin tour en bois or a beltmolen or Bockwindmühle is. Mjroots ( talk) 07:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
The British English script currently changes "cleanup" to "clean-up" in {{ Cleanup}} and as a parameter of {{ Multiple issues}}. Could this be avoided? McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just a few things I've discovered through using your great script. Currently, the Oxford script is incorrectly changing "arise" but is not changing "bastardise", "philosophise", "standardise" or "synthesise". Both scripts do not correct "aging" ("ageing"), "counterclockwise" ("anticlockwise" – make sure Oxford doesn't catch the ending), "breathalyze" ("breathalyse"), "cataloged" ("catalogued"), "cataloging" ("cataloguing"), "encyclopedia" ("encyclopaedia"), "encyclopedic" ("encyclopaedic" – but not in maintenance templates), "aerie" ("eyrie"), "gotten" ("got"), "licorice" ("liquorice"), "louver" ("louvre"), "math" ("maths"), "molt" ("moult"), "mollusk" ("mollusc"), "ocher" ("ochre"), "omelette" ("omelet"), "phony" ("phoney") and "specialty" ("speciality"). They're the main ones but not all of them. I've complied a (currently incomplete) list of British and American terms and spellings at User:Mclay1/Britishisms. It's useful for testing the scripts, although not all the list items can be corrected due to ambiguity. In some cases, an American spelling is more common in British English (e.g. "gramme"/"gram") or vice versa but in those cases I've only listed one spelling. Feel free to add to or correct the list if you want. McLerristarr | Mclay1 16:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
changing "arise" but is not changing "bastardise", "philosophise", "standardise" or "synthesise". Both scripts do not correct "aging" ("ageing"), "counterclockwise" ("anticlockwise" – make sure Oxford doesn't catch the ending), "breathalyze" ("breathalyse"), "cataloged" ("catalogued"), "cataloging" ("cataloguing"), "encyclopedia" ("encyclopaedia"), "encyclopedic" ("encyclopaedic" – but not in maintenance templates), "aerie" ("eyrie"), "gotten" ("got"), "licorice" ("liquorice"), "louver" ("louvre"), "math" ("maths"), "molt" ("moult"), "mollusk" ("mollusc"), "ocher" ("ochre"), "omelet" ("omelette"), "phony" ("phoney") and "specialty" ("speciality").
I figured that words like "math", "phony" and "gotten" are vernacular and likely to be used only in quotes, and conversion risks creating false positives; "Licorice" appears to be an acceptable British spelling, so I will not treat this. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 17:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just a query as to why you removed the wiki link to actor in this article. Would you let me know please as I regularly keep it up to date. Thanks Scrabble1968 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC).
A semi-fair response. I indeed should not be untowardly bitter towards you. I will change my tone, and now do offer my apologies for the above [on that page, where this was originally written], apparent rudeness. I stand by my assertion that the move to have the original page deleted was wrong, however. I won't say it was scurrilous. But I will say that I believe it was wrong, and I hope it will be fixed. More evidence on the topic has come out since then, and more continues to come to light. We will see a full explanation of the ghastly subject on Wikipedia, of that I am confident. Your problem has always been the misconception that information that incriminates the CCP is not neutral, simply because it incriminates the CCP and effectively validates Falun Gong's complaints. This is the wrong way to understand NPOV. Scholars should just follow the evidence, evaluate it impartially, and follow it to where it leads. Scholars should not suppress information that does not fit a precast notion of "neutrality," where because Falun Gong says 'A' and the CCP says 'Z', the truth must be 'M'. That isn't the meaning of neutrality. And we've seen vast attempts at information suppression based on just that principle. This single point is a large part of my frustration with my experience here, and part of the reason I took a long break after the unfair ban. I have not forgotten that you did not support my being banned, and for that and other reasons respect you. I don't intend to stick around for much longer. Some other editors did a pretty good job of cleaning up the massive mess the Falun Gong page was in (see TheSoundAndTheFury's extensive forensics in the archive; quite impressive), and now I just want to fine tune a number of points, revisit the persecution page, the overseas page, and possibly the organ harvesting page. That sounds like a lot, but I hope it will only take a few months. -- Asdfg 12345 05:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
You might have a point with what you say above. If you follow what I do, you will know that I am not adverse to seeing criticism of the CCP. I do understand that A may be correct from some people's perspective and Z may be correct from others'. The M½ you refer to might be yet another's point of view, yet it could turn out to be a horrible comprise that can never be truthful and that pleases no-one.
I feel much happier these last few months without going anywhere near a FLG article; in fact, even though I watchlisted several potential targets, I would always anxiously hope I would not come across any of the 'usual suspects' (from either side) in the course of editing; I would feel trepidation whenever I saw the name of one appear in the article history. It won't be long before I took those articles off my list. Now that the K&M Report article has survived AfD, I shall make a point to avoid it too. I hope you find your joy in the after-Wikilife. My consolation is that Wikipedia holds many other areas of interest for me that get my adrenaline flowing but do not significantly add to my blood pressure. Hasta la vista! -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 14:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ohconfucius,
I was going to notify you of this discussion regarding some inaccuracies in this week's "In the news" that had been introduced in one of your edits. I see you already became aware of it and I commend your response there. I have started a general discussion about such issues, which you are welcome to join.
Thanks for taking up the responsibility to cover the Arbitration report, it is appreciated, and after the earlier problems I was generally very pleased to see your constructive contributions to the last two issues of the Signpost. However, as I said on IRC at the time, I can't spare you a concluding public response to this, repeating that your edit-wars here and here were absolutely not acceptable, not only considering your own COI at the time and a notion regarding original reporting that directly contradicted Wikipedia:Signpost/About, but also because even more so than in mainspace articles, edit-wars are especially destructive in Signpost stories when publication time is near or overdue (like in the second example, where the story had already been up for 38 hours without any objections by others). I hope that such problems won't repeat, and our discussions in reaching that compromise as well as your recent constructive contributions give me some confidence about this.
Regards, HaeB ( talk) 09:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
My apologies for the offense caused and for assuming bad faith on your part. The comment was not meant as a personal attack but a questioning of your motives as a fellow opponent of political censorship. I hope to bury the hatchet and move along.-- William S. Saturn ( talk) 05:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I originally (maybe improperly) posted this question on User talk:Ohconfucius/EngvarB but didn't receive an answer. Instead of adding {{ EngvarB}} or {{ EngvarOx}}, should the script add {{ Use British English}} or {{ Use British (Oxford) English}} instead to avoid template redirects? GoingBatty ( talk) 03:21, 1 December 2010 (UTC)