![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Hi,
I removed Venix from Category:DEC operating systems. If we start doing this, then Linux is a Sun operating system, Windows is a Dell and Compaq operating system, and NetBSD will also have to be put in dozens of categories. Perhaps Foonly should be removed from Category:DEC hardware instead. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 11:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
You asked for a move of Vax gold key to Gold key. I've declined this as a technical move. 'Vax gold key' provides natural disambiguation, while the term ' Gold key' is already in use for a banking term. Feel free to open a {{ Requested move}} at Talk:Vax gold key. If you do so, please propose a way to disambiguate the Vax keyboard key from the bank-related meaning of Gold key. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:01, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey... just letting you know that I've blocked the original editor for several reasons, among them abuse of other editors (language on the talk page was awful) and because he made a few legal threats against other editors (threatened to call the cops). I doubt very seriously that he'll be able to make me feel comfortable about unblocking him in general, but even if by some chance he does change I don't think that it'd really be good to give him a copy in his userspace. I'll be honest that I doubt that his series will gain notability in the future, as the likelihood of notability is fairly slim to none and it would ultimately fall under WP:NOTWEBHOST. But mostly it's because the editor was so incredibly abusive that I honestly doubt he'll persuade anyone to unblock him. Between that and his spamming of various articles for his show and YT channel, he'd really, really have to prove himself above and beyond. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
While browsing the list of potential problems noticed by
WP:CHECKWIKI, I decided to check (and fix, if appropriate) some entries for error ID #62, “URL without http prefix”. On my fourth fix, I got a top-of-page warning that I hadn't seen before, the robot equivalent of a skeptical raised eyebrow, wondering if I was spamming Wikipedia with vanity links of my choice. (The edit got Tag: repeated addition of external links by non-autoconfirmed user, which
Special:Tags explains as “The user repeatedly and quickly added external links to articles”.) Well, yes, the edits were repeated — there were 18 potential problems on the CheckWiki #62 page, and I had only gotten to four of them at that point — and, yes, they were quick — it doesn't take long to type “http://”, enter an edit summary, preview to verify the change, and save the page. Hopefully some human will check the edit and see that (1) there's an actual edit summary, unlike many mal-edits, (2) the diff confirms that I wasn't adding a Web site address, I was just causing the existing one to cease being broken, and (3) the link is to the
International Civil Aviation Organization homepage at
www.icao.int, which is perhaps a less entertaining destination for true link spammers. But in the Big Picture, Supercount says that I'm about to pass 1000 edits from various IP addresses, maybe it's time to register a username.
50.181.30.121 (
talk)
23:38, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Unician! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Hello, I have noticed that you have tagged John Sampford for deletion under the A7 criteria. I have removed the tag as A7 only applies to people who have no claim of importance, and does not have to pass the notability standards, and being the manager of a sports team is a fairly good claim of importance. Thanks! Darylgolden( talk) 10:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I want to call your attention to WP:CITEVAR, which indicates the citation style of an article should not be changed unless consensus for the change is reached on the article's talk page. Jc3s5h ( talk) 15:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello — thanks for the extensive update of
Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks.
I have a couple of questions based on the new content, if you have a moment.
Unician ∇ 07:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Jm3 ( talk) 23:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't delete
Rajeesh menoth under
WP:CSD#A3 because it did have content at one time; however, the sole author (prior to your {{
speedy deletion-no content}}
) was also the person who had removed all content, so I deleted it under
WP:CSD#G7. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
10:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FreeLAN, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point-to-point ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
ww2censor ( talk) 15:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Virdhi Chand Jain may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Ikin is back; I've scoured the history. DS ( talk) 20:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
What a total prat you are. Giano (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
If an editor blanks a page, and no other editor has contributed substantially, then it should be deleted under G7. So why did you replace the content of Bune District here? It turns out to be a straight copy of Buni Zom, and blanking it was one of the editor's more sensible edits. Pam D 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Inquiring about this CHECKWIKI edit. From the reader's perspective the only visible effect is the removal of a useful color key from the bottom of the table. Please educate me, how does this improve the article? Mandruss ( talk) 12:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm guessing you have discovered my funny stuff page. ;-) -- I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{ Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 21:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
ww2censor ( talk) 13:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
It is very much appreciated. Another article, El Modelo, has been nominated for deletion under extremely similar circumstances. Smile Lee ( talk) 14:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello — Recently I reverted some vandalism from
this user. A while later, you blocked that user for vandalism and for having an inappropriate user name. I hope you'll pardon my ignorance, but may I ask why that user name was thought to be improper? Since it doesn't seem to attack or threaten anyone, or impersonate another individual, or suggest use by a company or group, all I could guess was that it's an offensive local idiom. Google is usually good at revealing the latest slang — there is always some teenage Web user, somewhere, eager to etch their latest language inventions in stone by adding it to an online list — but Google turned up nothing more relevant than
this. My apologies if this puts you in an awkward or embarrassing position, but could I buy a clue as to the (approximate) nature of the offense? Given that Wikipedia is a global discussion among multiple cultures, I'd rather know if there are new terms best not used in polite conversation. Thanks!
Unician
∇
09:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually I had meant to block him solely as a vandalism-only account—the bot at UAA picked up on the "shyte" in the middle of the username, which was a false pos (although one could also be a little concerned about the "88" suffix, it's not enough to block on sight). I used the link from UAA to make the block, which unfortunately only gives you vaublock as a choice in that situation. I will go and change the block. Daniel Case ( talk) 18:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noa Dar Dance Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kibbutz Degania and San José. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
clarify|reason=…}}
.
Unician
∇
11:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Thank you for the thank you. But all my suggested edits are being deleted and reverted. I requested external review to assess the material but other editors refused to wait. I escalated to dispute resolution. Would you please contribute at:
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!-- IseeEwe ( talk) 23:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Future software changes
07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
There has been a long history of content dispute regarding this article and the editor who posted the tag. That same editor has also been responsible for quite a bit of vandalism on the same article. Please investigate the history of this article for more information should you wish to get involved. Skyhook1 ( talk) 18:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems that user Skyhook1 may not have the door open to contribute after all. I can't say it's a big loss — while normally I'd regret the loss of so enthusiastic a contributor, for any topic, a single-purpose account with a username like that always had the smell of a conflict of interest. BatteryIncluded, you may have noticed that earlier in this thread, in my first response after Skyhook1 added this to my talk page and right after your first response, I phrased my text to imply that Skyhook1 has veto power over edits to the article, just to see the reaction. The optimist in me hoped to see a response like “oh no, I don't have veto power, no one owns the article”. Instead, the response (above) was to draw the lines between good guys and bad guys and to accuse you of sock-puppetry. Oh well, opportunity lost. The self-proclaimed Lone Voice of Truth act, fighting the good fight against the vast cabal of conspirators, got old fast. And then to invent a class of imaginary high school students as sock puppets, hoping that we wouldn't be as harsh if we thought we were speaking to children? Vug. (And then to stupidly squander whatever ill-gotten goodwill may have been achieved by giving the imaginary space-nerd kids a street gang attitude, “this is our turf now, we're the new consensus”? Double-vug. That's worse than just deceptive and manipulative; Skyhook1 is deceptive and manipulative and not even good at it.) So I cry no tears for the loss of a voice of disruption whose block was well earned. Thank you, admins, good call.
OK, end of venting.
I just noticed the article Momentum exchange tether, which I also see you have been active in building, although not as recently. It seems very similar to Skyhook (structure). I had previously found Space tether. And of course there's Space elevator. Is there an overall map as to the subject-area boundaries between these? There are several sets of criteria which could be used to divide the broad subject into individual articles, but it's not always obvious which criteria were chosen.
Unician ∇ 00:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Forbidden Forest of the Upper Cibeet River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forbidden Forest. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:21, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello —
I'm glad we now have an article on this historic instrument, thank you!
I realize that this is still a brand-new article, less than 24 hours old, and despite looking so polished, may still have the occasional rough edge to be addressed. Rather than trying to fiddle myself, in any major way, with a work-in-progress, may I mention some issues here?
Again, thank you for creating this article. There are a few minor tweaks that I feel I can make myself, but that shouldn't cause any disruption to your good work.
Unician ∇ 19:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unician
Thanks for the message on my article, I am in the process of writing numerous other articles on historic Omega but this is my first foray away from forum communities and in to wikipedia so your feedback is invaluable and I will of course take it on board.
Interesting feedback about the images, I am actually the second owner of the rare factory prototype, my name is Tom and if you google dickstar1977 you will see numerous web articles from me on these watches. I am (humbly) perhaps one of the most prolific collectors of megaquartz watches there is, I currently own 12 working examples of the 2400 series watches and a further 6 watches in spares or incomplete, in the last eight years I have owned a further 18, one of which is the prototype in my article, which is now on display at Swiss Time Services in the UK.
The images are all my own taken by me using a light box and the photoshop retouched for consistency, so thanks for your feedback on their professionalism. That said I am fortune that I collect watches, work in academia but have background in photography and film making in my early days
Anyway, again thanks for your feedback and I will review my article appropriately
Finally apologies if this is the wrong way in which to communicate but as you can see I am very new to wikipedia
Very best wishes Tom (my direct email is omega-collector@homtail.com), I assure you that my next subsequent articles will only improve on what I have already started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector ( talk • contribs) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unican
Thanks for the message, just about to upload the beta 21 Electroquartz article, just need to get home from Spain and add in the relevant references! Assuming you are also an Omega collector? Could I ask you name?
Best wishes Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
— Farix ( t | c) 21:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Wikidata
07:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unican! Thank you for reviewing my material and for your inquiry about the username. It's named "Food Allergy Experts" because we are a group of board members from FAAN (now FARE), the nation's largest non-profit food allergy resource. Therefore we think it's appropriate to utilize this name. Please advise: does that explain our decision? Or wouyld you still like us to come up with a different username? We aim to please ,and are striving towards a food allergy solution.
Thank you again. Food Allergy Experts, USA ( talk) 16:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, we're thrilled you are editing our page. Thank you! We'd asked if we needed to make a name change - with an explanation why we selected the name "Food Allergy Experts, USA". May you please kindly advise if we are all set with our current name, or if you believe it's in our best interest to make a change? THANK YOU! We appreciate your time & editing skills. Food Allergy Experts, USA ( talk) 21:50, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Future software changes
09:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
linksto:
keyword in your search.
[16]
[17]Future software changes
#wikimedia-office
at freenode.
[20]07:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I've raised all this at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Dougweller ( talk) 13:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Per the current language at Category:Antisemitism "[this category] must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic." Everything on Wikipedia is just an allegation, since we deal with WP:V, not WP:TRUTH. Furthermore, publications are undoubtedly a form of media. This policy was recently reaffirmed by an RfC. If you disagree with the current consensus, please take the matter up at the talk page per WP:CCC. After 12 months of arguing against this policy, even enduring a one month block for daring to question such wording on a similar category, given the outcome of the aforementioned RfC I've finally decided to go with the flow. Carrying out the existing WP:Consensus of the project can't reasonably be categorized as disruptive. [23] In short: Wikipedia:Don't shoot the messenger. If you think the message should change, then more power to you. -- Kendrick7 talk 03:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
User:Kendrick7, I really don't know why Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies can't be labelled as what it factually is, since doing so would not result in any "BLP" violation whatsoever... AnonMoos ( talk) 04:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Please review the opening post of the RfC. My bold: Should Category:Antisemitism and its various subcategories, per this 2011 CFD, continue to include the language that "It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic" despite the reality that it does, in practice, include individuals and groups that are, per WP:V and WP:RS, allegedly antisemitic? Perhaps that was poorly worded, but it's silly season to insist that the restriction should, for example, only apply to individuals, groups, or media which are stateless, and not to subcategories such as, for example Antisemitism in France and so on. If you look at the RfC discussion, I frequently cited Hitler as a prime example, although he was actually in Category:Antisemitism in Germany at the time, so I think it fairly obvious that subcategories were in play. Nevertheless, I've tried not to be too careless with the (fairly slow, considering) purge; I've made mistakes and thanked several editors for catching them. I admit, media wasn't first in anyone's mind during the RfC, but publications are clearly media, publishers are clearly groups, etc. Sure, I got sucked into this whole quagmire by an obtuse angle [26] (and, God willing, I will RfC that matter next) but this still isn't about me. -- Kendrick7 talk 03:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
09:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
mw-disambig
CSS class.
[29]
[30]08:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
09:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've restarted a discussion on the talk page of Buckingham Palace concerning whether or not the page needs an infobox ( Here). I noticed you were previously part of this discussion, so any input from you at this point would be much appreciated. Sotakeit ( talk) 16:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Software changes this week
Future changes
09:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent changes
phab:
and phabricator:
interwikis to link to
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org.
[45]
[46]06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Hi,
I removed Venix from Category:DEC operating systems. If we start doing this, then Linux is a Sun operating system, Windows is a Dell and Compaq operating system, and NetBSD will also have to be put in dozens of categories. Perhaps Foonly should be removed from Category:DEC hardware instead. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 11:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
You asked for a move of Vax gold key to Gold key. I've declined this as a technical move. 'Vax gold key' provides natural disambiguation, while the term ' Gold key' is already in use for a banking term. Feel free to open a {{ Requested move}} at Talk:Vax gold key. If you do so, please propose a way to disambiguate the Vax keyboard key from the bank-related meaning of Gold key. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 14:01, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey... just letting you know that I've blocked the original editor for several reasons, among them abuse of other editors (language on the talk page was awful) and because he made a few legal threats against other editors (threatened to call the cops). I doubt very seriously that he'll be able to make me feel comfortable about unblocking him in general, but even if by some chance he does change I don't think that it'd really be good to give him a copy in his userspace. I'll be honest that I doubt that his series will gain notability in the future, as the likelihood of notability is fairly slim to none and it would ultimately fall under WP:NOTWEBHOST. But mostly it's because the editor was so incredibly abusive that I honestly doubt he'll persuade anyone to unblock him. Between that and his spamming of various articles for his show and YT channel, he'd really, really have to prove himself above and beyond. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
While browsing the list of potential problems noticed by
WP:CHECKWIKI, I decided to check (and fix, if appropriate) some entries for error ID #62, “URL without http prefix”. On my fourth fix, I got a top-of-page warning that I hadn't seen before, the robot equivalent of a skeptical raised eyebrow, wondering if I was spamming Wikipedia with vanity links of my choice. (The edit got Tag: repeated addition of external links by non-autoconfirmed user, which
Special:Tags explains as “The user repeatedly and quickly added external links to articles”.) Well, yes, the edits were repeated — there were 18 potential problems on the CheckWiki #62 page, and I had only gotten to four of them at that point — and, yes, they were quick — it doesn't take long to type “http://”, enter an edit summary, preview to verify the change, and save the page. Hopefully some human will check the edit and see that (1) there's an actual edit summary, unlike many mal-edits, (2) the diff confirms that I wasn't adding a Web site address, I was just causing the existing one to cease being broken, and (3) the link is to the
International Civil Aviation Organization homepage at
www.icao.int, which is perhaps a less entertaining destination for true link spammers. But in the Big Picture, Supercount says that I'm about to pass 1000 edits from various IP addresses, maybe it's time to register a username.
50.181.30.121 (
talk)
23:38, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Unician! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Hello, I have noticed that you have tagged John Sampford for deletion under the A7 criteria. I have removed the tag as A7 only applies to people who have no claim of importance, and does not have to pass the notability standards, and being the manager of a sports team is a fairly good claim of importance. Thanks! Darylgolden( talk) 10:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
I want to call your attention to WP:CITEVAR, which indicates the citation style of an article should not be changed unless consensus for the change is reached on the article's talk page. Jc3s5h ( talk) 15:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello — thanks for the extensive update of
Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks.
I have a couple of questions based on the new content, if you have a moment.
Unician ∇ 07:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Jm3 ( talk) 23:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't delete
Rajeesh menoth under
WP:CSD#A3 because it did have content at one time; however, the sole author (prior to your {{
speedy deletion-no content}}
) was also the person who had removed all content, so I deleted it under
WP:CSD#G7. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
10:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FreeLAN, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point-to-point ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
ww2censor ( talk) 15:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Virdhi Chand Jain may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 18:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Ikin is back; I've scoured the history. DS ( talk) 20:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
What a total prat you are. Giano (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
If an editor blanks a page, and no other editor has contributed substantially, then it should be deleted under G7. So why did you replace the content of Bune District here? It turns out to be a straight copy of Buni Zom, and blanking it was one of the editor's more sensible edits. Pam D 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Inquiring about this CHECKWIKI edit. From the reader's perspective the only visible effect is the removal of a useful color key from the bottom of the table. Please educate me, how does this improve the article? Mandruss ( talk) 12:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm guessing you have discovered my funny stuff page. ;-) -- I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{ Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 21:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
ww2censor ( talk) 13:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
It is very much appreciated. Another article, El Modelo, has been nominated for deletion under extremely similar circumstances. Smile Lee ( talk) 14:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello — Recently I reverted some vandalism from
this user. A while later, you blocked that user for vandalism and for having an inappropriate user name. I hope you'll pardon my ignorance, but may I ask why that user name was thought to be improper? Since it doesn't seem to attack or threaten anyone, or impersonate another individual, or suggest use by a company or group, all I could guess was that it's an offensive local idiom. Google is usually good at revealing the latest slang — there is always some teenage Web user, somewhere, eager to etch their latest language inventions in stone by adding it to an online list — but Google turned up nothing more relevant than
this. My apologies if this puts you in an awkward or embarrassing position, but could I buy a clue as to the (approximate) nature of the offense? Given that Wikipedia is a global discussion among multiple cultures, I'd rather know if there are new terms best not used in polite conversation. Thanks!
Unician
∇
09:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually I had meant to block him solely as a vandalism-only account—the bot at UAA picked up on the "shyte" in the middle of the username, which was a false pos (although one could also be a little concerned about the "88" suffix, it's not enough to block on sight). I used the link from UAA to make the block, which unfortunately only gives you vaublock as a choice in that situation. I will go and change the block. Daniel Case ( talk) 18:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noa Dar Dance Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kibbutz Degania and San José. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
{{
clarify|reason=…}}
.
Unician
∇
11:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Thank you for the thank you. But all my suggested edits are being deleted and reverted. I requested external review to assess the material but other editors refused to wait. I escalated to dispute resolution. Would you please contribute at:
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!-- IseeEwe ( talk) 23:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Future software changes
07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
There has been a long history of content dispute regarding this article and the editor who posted the tag. That same editor has also been responsible for quite a bit of vandalism on the same article. Please investigate the history of this article for more information should you wish to get involved. Skyhook1 ( talk) 18:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems that user Skyhook1 may not have the door open to contribute after all. I can't say it's a big loss — while normally I'd regret the loss of so enthusiastic a contributor, for any topic, a single-purpose account with a username like that always had the smell of a conflict of interest. BatteryIncluded, you may have noticed that earlier in this thread, in my first response after Skyhook1 added this to my talk page and right after your first response, I phrased my text to imply that Skyhook1 has veto power over edits to the article, just to see the reaction. The optimist in me hoped to see a response like “oh no, I don't have veto power, no one owns the article”. Instead, the response (above) was to draw the lines between good guys and bad guys and to accuse you of sock-puppetry. Oh well, opportunity lost. The self-proclaimed Lone Voice of Truth act, fighting the good fight against the vast cabal of conspirators, got old fast. And then to invent a class of imaginary high school students as sock puppets, hoping that we wouldn't be as harsh if we thought we were speaking to children? Vug. (And then to stupidly squander whatever ill-gotten goodwill may have been achieved by giving the imaginary space-nerd kids a street gang attitude, “this is our turf now, we're the new consensus”? Double-vug. That's worse than just deceptive and manipulative; Skyhook1 is deceptive and manipulative and not even good at it.) So I cry no tears for the loss of a voice of disruption whose block was well earned. Thank you, admins, good call.
OK, end of venting.
I just noticed the article Momentum exchange tether, which I also see you have been active in building, although not as recently. It seems very similar to Skyhook (structure). I had previously found Space tether. And of course there's Space elevator. Is there an overall map as to the subject-area boundaries between these? There are several sets of criteria which could be used to divide the broad subject into individual articles, but it's not always obvious which criteria were chosen.
Unician ∇ 00:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Forbidden Forest of the Upper Cibeet River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forbidden Forest. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:21, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello —
I'm glad we now have an article on this historic instrument, thank you!
I realize that this is still a brand-new article, less than 24 hours old, and despite looking so polished, may still have the occasional rough edge to be addressed. Rather than trying to fiddle myself, in any major way, with a work-in-progress, may I mention some issues here?
Again, thank you for creating this article. There are a few minor tweaks that I feel I can make myself, but that shouldn't cause any disruption to your good work.
Unician ∇ 19:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unician
Thanks for the message on my article, I am in the process of writing numerous other articles on historic Omega but this is my first foray away from forum communities and in to wikipedia so your feedback is invaluable and I will of course take it on board.
Interesting feedback about the images, I am actually the second owner of the rare factory prototype, my name is Tom and if you google dickstar1977 you will see numerous web articles from me on these watches. I am (humbly) perhaps one of the most prolific collectors of megaquartz watches there is, I currently own 12 working examples of the 2400 series watches and a further 6 watches in spares or incomplete, in the last eight years I have owned a further 18, one of which is the prototype in my article, which is now on display at Swiss Time Services in the UK.
The images are all my own taken by me using a light box and the photoshop retouched for consistency, so thanks for your feedback on their professionalism. That said I am fortune that I collect watches, work in academia but have background in photography and film making in my early days
Anyway, again thanks for your feedback and I will review my article appropriately
Finally apologies if this is the wrong way in which to communicate but as you can see I am very new to wikipedia
Very best wishes Tom (my direct email is omega-collector@homtail.com), I assure you that my next subsequent articles will only improve on what I have already started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector ( talk • contribs) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unican
Thanks for the message, just about to upload the beta 21 Electroquartz article, just need to get home from Spain and add in the relevant references! Assuming you are also an Omega collector? Could I ask you name?
Best wishes Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
— Farix ( t | c) 21:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Wikidata
07:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Unican! Thank you for reviewing my material and for your inquiry about the username. It's named "Food Allergy Experts" because we are a group of board members from FAAN (now FARE), the nation's largest non-profit food allergy resource. Therefore we think it's appropriate to utilize this name. Please advise: does that explain our decision? Or wouyld you still like us to come up with a different username? We aim to please ,and are striving towards a food allergy solution.
Thank you again. Food Allergy Experts, USA ( talk) 16:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, we're thrilled you are editing our page. Thank you! We'd asked if we needed to make a name change - with an explanation why we selected the name "Food Allergy Experts, USA". May you please kindly advise if we are all set with our current name, or if you believe it's in our best interest to make a change? THANK YOU! We appreciate your time & editing skills. Food Allergy Experts, USA ( talk) 21:50, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Future software changes
09:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
linksto:
keyword in your search.
[16]
[17]Future software changes
#wikimedia-office
at freenode.
[20]07:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I've raised all this at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Dougweller ( talk) 13:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Per the current language at Category:Antisemitism "[this category] must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic." Everything on Wikipedia is just an allegation, since we deal with WP:V, not WP:TRUTH. Furthermore, publications are undoubtedly a form of media. This policy was recently reaffirmed by an RfC. If you disagree with the current consensus, please take the matter up at the talk page per WP:CCC. After 12 months of arguing against this policy, even enduring a one month block for daring to question such wording on a similar category, given the outcome of the aforementioned RfC I've finally decided to go with the flow. Carrying out the existing WP:Consensus of the project can't reasonably be categorized as disruptive. [23] In short: Wikipedia:Don't shoot the messenger. If you think the message should change, then more power to you. -- Kendrick7 talk 03:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
User:Kendrick7, I really don't know why Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies can't be labelled as what it factually is, since doing so would not result in any "BLP" violation whatsoever... AnonMoos ( talk) 04:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Please review the opening post of the RfC. My bold: Should Category:Antisemitism and its various subcategories, per this 2011 CFD, continue to include the language that "It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic" despite the reality that it does, in practice, include individuals and groups that are, per WP:V and WP:RS, allegedly antisemitic? Perhaps that was poorly worded, but it's silly season to insist that the restriction should, for example, only apply to individuals, groups, or media which are stateless, and not to subcategories such as, for example Antisemitism in France and so on. If you look at the RfC discussion, I frequently cited Hitler as a prime example, although he was actually in Category:Antisemitism in Germany at the time, so I think it fairly obvious that subcategories were in play. Nevertheless, I've tried not to be too careless with the (fairly slow, considering) purge; I've made mistakes and thanked several editors for catching them. I admit, media wasn't first in anyone's mind during the RfC, but publications are clearly media, publishers are clearly groups, etc. Sure, I got sucked into this whole quagmire by an obtuse angle [26] (and, God willing, I will RfC that matter next) but this still isn't about me. -- Kendrick7 talk 03:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
09:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
mw-disambig
CSS class.
[29]
[30]08:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
09:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I've restarted a discussion on the talk page of Buckingham Palace concerning whether or not the page needs an infobox ( Here). I noticed you were previously part of this discussion, so any input from you at this point would be much appreciated. Sotakeit ( talk) 16:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
Software changes this week
Future changes
09:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Recent changes
phab:
and phabricator:
interwikis to link to
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org.
[45]
[46]06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)