This page 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.

2008, May Information

(X-Posted) Greetings, you recently moved Good Enough to Good Enough (Evanescence song) and redirected it to its disambiguation page. This move has been reverted, because the Evanescence song is the only song with that name to have an actual article. Since all other versions are redirects, the 1) existing or 2) most notable article takes the primary name. If you have any questions, please leave a message on my talk page. Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 02:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I have moved the discussion to Talk:Good Enough and replied there. The way, the truth, and the light ( talk) 02:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Note: further discussion located at Talk:Good Enough (Evanescence song)#Page move. Page was eventually moved back to TWTT&TL's article name.

Thanks for commenting at User talk:Danorton. It is getting weird. Look at the response on my talk page. I am not sure what is going on so I have asked a question at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). It is no big deal, of course but some things just make you go 'huh?'. Lightmouse ( talk) 22:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hey, I noticed your edit at {{ WPFISHING}}, are you trying to add the nesting function, or do something else? If you need any help with functionality of the template, let me know and I'll fix it up. Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, {{ WPFISHING}} won't nest properly, and I don't know why. Much gratitude if you can fix it. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 22:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) No problem, give me some time and I'll see what I can do. I may do some code overhaul too, but at the very least, I'll use my pre-existing {{ WikiProject Tennessee}} and a template so everything will work fine off the bat. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that Huntster. There is still the problem of the extra white space at the top, as you pointed out earlier. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 00:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) In all the pages I test-checked, it wasn't showing up. Are you seeing the problem on a certain article? — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 01:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. On Talk:Whitby it has extra white space at the top in its collapsed state. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 01:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Heh, yes, that is actually from {{ WikiProject Yorkshire}}, which I'm working on right now :) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 01:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh good stuff! -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 01:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I am currently trying to track down a version of an article from a long time ago. I know that a user edited a certain article in a timespan of about a year, and I know exactly what the edit they made was. Is there a quicker way of finding the edit version rather than searching through the entire history of that article looking for it? Thanks, TheMoridian 09:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) As far as I'm aware, there is no way to search the history of an article. However, what is the article in question, and what are you specifically looking for? Any hints on that timespan? — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 09:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. The article in question is the Russia article, the edit made to it consisted of changing the capital city to 'Stockport' (and may possibly be followed by a revert edit by the same user), and the time period is from September 2006 to May 2007. I'm 90% sure that it was before January 2007 but I can't be certain. Please reply on my talk page, and thanks for your help. TheMoridian 14:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Oh my. That encompasses somewhere around 2,500 edits, which at the rate my computer loads pages, would take around eight to ten hours to manually check (yeah, best speed is four or five pages a minute, tops). There's just no way I can go through that many. Best I can recommend is either narrow the timeframe a bit, or start at this diff and work your way forward. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 02:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

:) I was expecting something like that. I'll search manually, thanks anyway. TheMoridian 09:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Note: cross-posted from User talk:Dihydrogen Monoxide.

(X-Posted) Just a quick thanks for the Betacommand Commons endorsement. With any luck I'll make some good use of this. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Not a problem, fingers crossed it'll be accepted. That said, I find using CommonsHelper easier myself, but each to his own. dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) By the way, it seems you're not an admin. Why not? Interested? dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I've been toying with the idea for some time now, but I didn't want to self-nom (for no particular reason, really). To be honest, I really only see myself using the mop and bucket for just a few things, such as some vandalism-handling, working with protected pages (especially templates, as that's my speciality along with citations), and a other bits here and there. I'd always be ready to help whomever asks for it, but I'm concerned I'd be more of a very low-key admin, and I'm not sure that is wanted by the community at this time. Still, as I mentioned, I've been thinking about it. Probably best to apply for editor review first, just to get some third-party options as to my ability 'round here. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I've heard and seen plenty of good things about/from you. You've been around for a while. You've made plenty of edits. You've improved articles, reverted vandalism, and helped people out in other areas. The recent trend at RfA has been for low key candidates... I nudged Kakofonous through most recently, and there have been a few others. Your kind of thing. You up for a nom? dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I think I might be. I do, however, hereby reserve the right to screw up. My biggest problem is that I doubt I can answer many of the questions that will be posed. I simply haven't stepped very far into the areas that are typically asked of. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) My motto is RfA additional questions are not for fishing. IMO the questions are silly and unnecessary. If you're unsure on one and do want to answer, just take it slow. Read the policy, ask around, whatever. There's no rush. Anyway, I'm writing a nom now. Feel free to reject it if you're not feeling up for it when it's done. dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) This is appreciated. It will at the very least determine opinion as to my readiness to step into that vasty nothingness. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Huntster is ready when you are! dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I thank you for your help in this. I'll begin filling it out as RL work permits :) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 09:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yay! Good to see you accepted, looking forward to seeing you pass. btw. did you get my MSN add? dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 01:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Not as of yet. I just got a blazin' new computer for home and haven't set up Trillian. Will do when I get off work. Re: the RfA, hopefully I answered the questions acceptably. I don't always know when I'm rambling ;) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 01:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) All looks great! dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 01:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

has already offered you a nomination, but I was wondering if I could tag along to? I've been looking over your contribs, talk archives and anything else possible over the past two hours. I've come to the conclusion that you are long time in the waiting. Regards, Rudget ( Help?) 16:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I'd be honored if you wanted to do this. As I mentioned to DHMO, I'll be working on this nom today when I can, but I'm training someone at work, so time is somewhat limited. Thank you so much. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 19:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for letting me co-nom. Rudget ( Help?) 13:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Wish you all the best for your RFA -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 05:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Tinucherian, much appreciated :) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 05:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what exactly you've been trying to do with the template, and attempting to repair it is beyond me. At present it looks like you've reordered the parameters so that the year appears first. I can't imagine this was your intention, so if you could take another look at it, it would be most appreciated. -- Kéiryn ( talk) 17:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Greetings. This change was actually intentional, to bring it in line with the format most of the other citation templates use (aside from Cite news, off the top of my head). Aside from this, have you found any problems? Why is this item a concern? Just curious. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am quite curious about this. Most maps don't have a proper "author" or a single individual responsible for their creation. I know the Official Michigan Department of Transportation map doesn't have an author. In fact to attribute a map to a single cartographer is the exception, not the rule. As a result of your changes, the year is the first item that shows for 13 of the maps referenced in M-35 (Michigan highway), a recent FA. A few of the other references don't have issue years known and then default to the map title first instead. I would advice that you revert your changes to account for this fact. Imzadi1979 ( talk) 23:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I know, which is why I set it up that way. It follows the scheme used by most of the other Citation systems...if author and year is not available, title comes first. As far as I can recall, Cite map (originally) and Cite press release are the only ones that use publisher first. This seems highly irregular. Except for the year issue, I based the new scheme on the suggested citation format here and on various other suggested map schemes, which all seem to agree with each other. However, I melded those with the formats typically seen on-wiki...after all, we use neither strict MLA or APA formats on wiki, just a blend of everything. Now, I'm not trying to simply defend the changes, just stating my rationale for changing. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 00:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I get your rationale, but for maps, the publisher is more like the author for other reference types in addition to being the entity that actually physically produces the map. In most cases, a year is known and it's very strange to start a reference with the year in parenthesis. That's mostly why the publisher was listed first. I'd still advise reversion to that practice. Imzadi1979 ( talk) 01:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Note: further discussion took place at Template talk:Cite map, leading to edits being reverted.

Ich habe mein erste Deutsche wikipediaseite! http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villanova_University

Wow. I'm a dork. And you're related to me. Bwahahahah. nf utvol ( talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Cuz, I'm the dork, you are just mentally deficient. However, given that you are conversant (or at least literate) in another language, I suppose that means you are, in some small way, superior to me. However, that may change soon, as I've been nominated for administratorship on the site! (please, no applause...) I shall lord that over you for years to come. Just because. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 21:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks,
WHLfan ( talk) 22:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding User talk:WHLfan#Help with Vandalism.

Hi. I thought I'd start with the merging of the remaining Stargate spaceships soon since it's been almost two weeks with no new input. Now, someone has contacted me and said that my chosen wording of "starship" sounds too much like Star Trek. So before I go ahead and make more of a naming mess, can you tell me another word that includes everything from F-302 to Tel'tak to Ancient City Ship? Spaceships in Stargate? Starcrafts in Stargate? (I'll rename the other articles accordingly then, including fixing the double redirects.) Thanks in advance. – sgeureka ^{t• c} 21:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hey Sgeureka, nice job on the merges, as I've mentioned before. However, I notice that two critical things were not performed. One, make sure that for any images that you retain from the merged article, you update the fair-use rationales so that they link to the current page...else the bots that roam will mark them for deletion as missing a valid rationale. Second, when you merge multiple pages into one, leaving the original talk pages behind, make sure you link to those talk pages on the new page's talk, as I've done at Talk:Ancient starships in Stargate. This is just so people can look back and see previous discussions. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 01:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll keep the talk page notifications in mind (in fact, I am thinking of adding {{ merged}} to all the SG lists, which may solve this "problem" as well). About the images, as far as I know, image bots do recognize redirects, and I always fix double-redirects when I merge articles, so everything should be fine. – sgeureka ^{t• c} 08:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Eh, maybe they've gotten smarter, but I know they didn't used to. Well, just keep an eye on the talk pages, in case any notifications pop up. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

2008, June Information

(X-Posted) I see you place a merge tag on the Evanescence song Lithium's article, but gave no explanation on the talk page. I can see why you would suggest such a merge, but I'd still recommend a section be started by you on the Evanescence Lithium talk page. If such a merge were to go through, I would ask for a definitive source for the information in the article, other than simply saying it came from her website (aka, a source for release date and other such info). I can perform the merge with no problem, but I would like to have that. I can't see this being a particularly controversial move, given that there is no real notability attached to the song or article, so after about a week (unless something changes), I'll take care of it. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 03:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Done. Let me know if you need anything else from me. - Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 04:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you've gain sufficient consensus to pass, only two more hours now! Well done on such an excellent job: great answers, responsiveness. I look forward to working with you more in the future. Rudget ( Help?) 18:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjB scribe 22:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!! :D (Though I didn't manage to vote!) The Helpful One ^(Review) 22:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Well done and also good luck with the mop :) AngelOfSadness talk 22:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well! -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 02:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you all :) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 02:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

5 hours late...but good job! Have fun with the new tools! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 02:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Copying what I wrote at WT:RFA:
In lieu of the thank-spam that so often gets sent (and which I don't care for), I'd like to extend my most sincere thanks to those that commented on my RfA. I will work daily to never cause those whose expressed their support to regret their decision. Thank you all. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Rock on mate! dihydrogen monoxide ( H₂O) 08:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. Mr. Admin.. use to mop wisely -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

May God help us all... Teehee. At least now I have a good bribe-able contact on the inside. nf utvol ( talk) 20:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}}
(X-Posted) The map that I get after inserting {{GeoGroupTemplate}} into Category:Mountains of Tajikistan (following the example of Category:Lakes of Tajikistan) does not show all the mountains listed in this category and one of the mountains -- Avicenna -- is shown in an incorrect position. How can I update the content underlying this otherwise great map (and possibly create similar maps for other categories)? I sent an e-mail with this question to ts-admins@wikimedia.org a few days back, but no reply. -- Zlerman ( talk) 05:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) The way this template works is by collecting the coordinates from each individual article inside the category. If an article doesn't have a coordinate template already in the article, it will not show up when you use that template. Also, if the coordinates are wrong in the resulting map, that means they are incorrect in the article. Further, any articles whose names are in italics in the category won't show up either, since these are redirects (doesn't look like a problem here, since they appear to be alternate names of Lenin Peak). To add coordinates to an article, use the {{ coord}} template in that article. If you have any more questions, please leave a message on my talk page. Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 06:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response to my plea for help. I will try to follow your instructions on my talk page and hope for the best. If I fail, I will have to come back for more guidance. Best, -- Zlerman ( talk) 08:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Ask for any help you need, I'll do all I can. Just remember to carefully read the instructions on each Template page...they usually explain themselves quite well. Also look how the template is used on other articles...that's the best place, since you see it in action. Good luck! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it's not working for me. I have now saved Category:Mountains of Tajikistan with {{GeoGroupTemplate}} so that you can actually bring up the map and see my problem. I have added {{coor}} templates to three new mountains: Karl Marx Peak, Mayakovskiy Peak, Independence Peak. Still, they do not show on the map, while Avicenna shows on its own, but in the wrong place: Avicenna is Italicized in the category list (redirected to Lenin Peak) and thus should not show at all. The other three peaks on the map -- Lenin Peak, Peak Korzhenevskaya, Ismoil Somoni Peak -- show correctly. In place of the fourth peak ("Avicenna") we should have Independence Peak. I have re-read the {{GeoGroupTemplate}} page, but it seems to deal only with articles, not categories. Can you figure this out and tell me what I did wrong? I am probably missing something about the {{coor}} template. Thanks for your time. -- Zlerman ( talk) 11:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Aha, I misspoke after too briefly looking at the template code. Turns out that, at least when it comes to Categories, the template pulls information not from Wikipedia itself, but from the Wikimedia toolserver en.wiki database dump. Since these dumps only occur ever so often (and seemingly at a rate that slows down as the number of articles grows larger), any information that has been added or changed since the last dump won't show up when this template is used. This explains why some map points are missing, and why that one redirected article still shows up. In any case, there is absolutely nothing we can do about this (and apparently there have been some problems with the dumps lately...last update to the toolserver appears to be August 31, 2007). Still, looks like a useful template, especially if you are dealing with actual lists of geographic coordinates. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 03:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the latest clarification. I will patiently await the next dump/update, which hopefully will occur not later than August 2008. But at least now I understand the mechanism behind these fantastic maps. Best, -- Zlerman ( talk) 03:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}}
(X-Posted) I do not know what i did wrongly at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NL_First_Logo.gif Thanks Zuff ( talk) 09:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hi there. I don't see anything done incorrectly on that image page either...mind explaining what you need help with? Also, if you want your userpage ( User:Zuff) deleted, as I think you are asking for above, let me know and I'll take care of it. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 11:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank You ;) Heehee Originally, after reverting back the pokimon picture back to the original, my browser continued to display the Pokimon picture even though in the "smaller resolution", however after closing my browser and going in again, the page shows the expected picture. Thanks ;) I had made a wrong request to delete my own page as I was trying to figure out some of the "new" tabs after i enable them in my settings. :p I'm sorry if i shouldn't have replied you here. Enjoy your weekend. :D Best Wishes, Zuff ( talk) 15:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hehe, so you are using either Twinkle or Friendly :) Good programs, just be careful...they are powerful. If it was a mistake, then I'll go ahead and close out the MfD request. Also, where you placed your reply was fine, though it is generally preferred to add new sections at the bottom of the page for such. Doesn't really matter though :D Have a good weekend as well! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hey there, noticed you removed the table from Music recording sales certification and replaced with a link. I actually think that was a great move, however, looking at the table on the other article, I really believe the one on MRSC had superior formatting and data. Might I suggest moving the table from MRSC to the other article (replacing it)? Or do you have a reason in mind for not doing so? Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 11:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Huntster, thanks for the note. I think I might have been a little heavy handed with deleting the table from the main page, maybe I should have at least mentioned on the talk page first. But I moved the table over to the talk page, so hopefully all is not lost. Anyways, when I started the page, I took a long hard look at the list at Music recording sales certification and also Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Certifications, and I admit to copying a bit from each. The reason I changed the formatting of the table is for a couple reasons. First, my intention with the new list is to aid in discography articles (specifically for the Discography WikiProject). So if some discography says an album was certified gold in France, the user can go to the new list and check out exactly what that means. So, my main intention was to make it easily accessible. So, I tried to keep only the most relevant stuff in the table (country, certifying body, and awards). Everything else (which probably won't be that useful to 99% of the users) is in a footnote or an in-line citation. Along the same lines, I tried to split the list into multiple tables (rather then one humongous one) to aid in readability and accessability. Hopefully that makes sense.

But there's one thing that you mentioned that confuses me: you said you thought the data was superior in the other table. How so? As I was making the new list, I noticed a good amount of info that wasn't in either of the other tables I looked at.

Anyways, thanks for the note, and I look forward to your response. Drewcifer ( talk) 19:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I'm sorry, I really only meant that the formatting of information seemed better on the old chart. The new chart emphasizes the certifying body too much and does not have columns for "Info as of" and "Source", which I found very useful. I guess I can see use in having separate tables for each type, but I preferred the old because it was more concise. At the end of the day, of course, so long as all data is present, it'll be fine. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 02:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

You're still a member of CAP, right? Do you have access to any of the L-Tronics Little L-Per equipment? —   scetoaux ( T| C) 22:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I'm still a member, but I'm displaced from my home squadron by 100 miles. We have an L-Per (last time I checked), but access wouldn't be soon. What's up? — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The L-Tronics article I linked to is in desperate need of pictures to illustrate the L-Pers. I figured you probably had one of the older wooden ones, since most squadrons do. But since it'd be a lot of work for you, I'll look elsewhere. Thanks anyways! :) —   scetoaux ( T| C) 23:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Well, see if you can find something else, but if not, remind me in a while and I'll try to get some pictures next time I go home. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 23:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. All else failing I'll take the pictures myself. I just don't do so because whenever I have access to them, I'm supposed to be using them, not taking pictures. :P —   scetoaux ( T| C) 23:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Checked with my father who is also a member, and we definitely still have the L-Per, and I'll be heading back home in early July, so hopefully I'll remember the camera and get that shot for you. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 21:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, that would be terrific. :) —   scetoaux ( T| C) 22:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I can try and get a picture or two before then. Not sure what I'll be able to swing, the only L-Per my unit has regular access to is the private property of a member. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 23:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Go ahead OC...I'll still try to get a pic of my own. No such thing as "too many" :) — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 23:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I should have my hands on an L-Per tomorrow. Will try to get pictures then. -- OuroborosCobra ( talk) 23:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Hi Fuzzy, looking for an opinion on something. The article Book of Mirrors was created middle of last year, and has received virtually no activity since then. Even more, it has no citations. I've never heard of it, though the specific term is in Google around 10,000 times...unknown how many are directly related to paganism. I'm close to prodding this as non-notable/unreferenced, but I wanted to ask what you thought. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 22:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

According to someone's comment at Talk:Book of Shadows a fellow named Gary Cantrell makes reference to a "Mirror Book" in his book Wiccan Beliefs and Practices. I had originally assumed it was a Scott Cunningham innovation, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It has no notable place in Wicca as far as I can tell (it's certainly not part of traditional lineaged Wicca, what I call "Wicca"), and it's been without citation for a very long time (first at Book of Shadows and now in the Book of Mirrors article). It's obviously simply a magical diary rebranded with a wiccanesque name, probably invented within the last 5 years by a two-bit author cashing in on the neopagan publishing frenzy. I would be all in favour of deleting it. Maybe if we ever have a Magical diary article the concept could be revived for a brief mention in that. Fuzzypeg ★ 23:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Thanks for the reply. I've gone ahead and prodded it.

Goodness, need to get your talk page archived! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 23:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. User:Loghead1 keeps adding the same two inappropriate links to the Corner Gas article. He doesn't seem to be a spammer in general, so I can't really put him or his sites on the spam noticeboard, and I'm the only user to have contacted him about this issue so I can't get an RfC for now. You also undid his edit at least once as it's obvious that the petition and "fansite" (which is really a social network site for a very restraint group of people) are inappropriate links. He added them again, despite my message on his talk page, he responded on my own talk page, claiming neither links violate the guidelines (all spammers say that of course...) and I can't remove them a third time today without violating 3RR. Would you be so kind as helping me with this matter?-- Boffob ( talk) 23:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift action. I contacted the user again. Hopefully he'll understand eventually.-- Boffob ( talk) 00:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

While I enjoyed being ganged up on, I would much rather you didn't do it again. Thank you! Loghead1 ( talk) 02:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: see User talk:Loghead1#Corner Gas.

(X-Posted) Hi Tratos, I was looking at your talk page and noticed that the Talk Page Guidelines table wasn't properly close at top, leading to interesting formatting on the rest of the page. I've gone ahead and close it. If you intended the design to look that way, feel free to undo my edit, though I'm concerned folks may have a hard time reading your page in that particular font. Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 08:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess i accidentally made my page like that, but after i did i sort of liked it that way i guess. So can you revert it please? I actually want to make it black with red letters, but i dont yet know how ( even though i know quite alot, just not that). Thanks,'

Tratos the Great >|< —Preceding comment was added at 01:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I dont know how to, i just messed it up. Tratos —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tratos the Great ( talk • contribs) 01:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Okay, it's back to how it was. Cheers! — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 09:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I've created these articles:

• Gray witch
• Fire magick
• Gray magic

And I need your help to improve them. Will you help? If they get deleted then i'll put them on the The requests for articles page. Thanks a million. -- Condalence ( 15:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thought you'd like to know that there's another, new, Canadian channel Cosmopolitan TV that airs Charmed since it popped up in February. I would add it myself to the syndication section but my flash player isn't working right now. :o( Robinepowell ( talk) 21:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) I've gone ahead and added the material you requested, however, just so you know, I'm no longer active in the Charmed areas. The hostility was just getting too great for my taste. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 23:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Too bad about all the hostility on Charmed. Robinepowell ( talk) 00:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

Your monobook needs to be updated to avoid an error. The convert template code has changed and it will no longer accept 'sq' or 'cu' with metric units. Thus '|sqkm|' will have to be changed to '|km2|'. All existing pages have been updated. Any new use of the template with '|sqkm|' will produce an error on the page. The code for non-metric units is unchanged and can be either '|sqft|' or '|ft2|' format.

For example:

• {{convert|$2|sqft|sqm}}

should be changed to

• {{convert|$2|sqft|m2}}

If you want more advice, please ask at Template talk:Convert. Or ask me, I would be glad to help you update your monobook code. Regards Lightmouse ( talk) 09:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Doh, thanks for the reminder Lightmouse, been meaning to do that. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 09:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. Lightmouse ( talk) 09:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I've undid your recent revert on Uluru, please see the discussion of last October Talk:Uluru#Geology & Creationism and consider that the user who added that bit originally has been indef blocked as a sock. Vsmith ( talk) 17:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

(X-Posted) Regarding the article talk material, I'll take your word for it. I'm disappointed that sources which address the issues raised have not been added to the article as was originally planned. Interesting though that he was blocked as a sock, I hadn't been aware of that. — Huntster ( t • @ • c) 18:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)