Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

12 December 2024 News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin In focus: Are Wikipedia articles representative of Western or world knowledge? In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody Opinion: Worm That Turned's reconfirmation RfA debriefing Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Thank you for conforming the heading on my EfD listing to the more common XfD terminology. I agree your wording is more in keeping with the usual XfD wording, and therefore, in context, much funnier. Regards, Newyorkbrad 11:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Gracenotes, the editor you are, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that you satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space. Your opinions on yourself are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at User:R/EFD#Gracenotes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit during the discussion but should not remove the editors for deletion template from the top of your userpage; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you, and have a good sense of humor :). --(Review Me) R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 04:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I was changing it from radianss to radians. I know what the plural form or radian is. Sarbruis 07:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Assuming it's you and not an impostor, obviously... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.73.137.190 (talk) 18:30, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you mean by "you", exactly. Your below post makes sense, but I honestly can't put it into the context of any recent discussions I've had with other Wikipedians. Maybe you're trying to contact Grace Note (talk · contribs)—maybe not. Please advise. Gracenotes^T § 03:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I turned down several nominations for adminship before finally accepting, I have absolutely no need to "throw my weight around" on Wikipedia for kicks, I can do that any day of the week at work just by being the BOFH for a while. Believe it or not I actually care about people abusing Wikipedia for self-promotion and propaganda. Of course, sometimes I over-react in that respect, but that's just me getting carried away - in the end, a contributor is not the same as a zealot or a nutter; very few zealots or nutters are able to actually contribute unbiased content. Of course, sometimes unbiased content can be the result of the average between opposing zealots, but I don't think the compromise is achieved at the extremes, I think it's achieved by the moderates and those who are at least willing to acknowledge that the other party has a valid reason for seeing things as they do. Guy 11:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Bangladesh/back to main page looks amazingly beautiful now. Thanks for the kindness. I have been in particular pain finding that the Bangladeshi Wikipedians I know to be very prolific on WP and efficient with the codes are "not interested" in helping with codes. If you don't mind I would like to ask for help with a bit more coding for the Wikiproject Bangladesh. Please, respond to my talk page. Cheers. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 02:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey. If you might remember, you made a comment on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie (the bottom of the page) that I thought was rather good.

By all means, say "Delete, because it's not funny and fails to serve its function"; really, people that vote "Keep, it's funny" should have no more problem with that vote than you have with theirs. If people agree with you, they will vote in a similar manner. And you're treating ITSFUNNY like it's policy or something. Maybe use its logic, not its mere existence.

Well said. I was reading through the MfD and he was throwing the ITSFUNNY essay around the discussion like there was no tomorrow. I was surprised no one was commenting on that but finally, at the end, someone stuck it to him! Wikipedia is starting to get the atmosphere of a mortuary (with the whole picture policies and such). While I know seriousness in an encyclopedia is necessary, it's good to have a bit of fun here and there, but yet, there are people trying to ruin it. Why am I telling you this? I should be telling it to Konstable. Too bad he's retired :) Ah well. Cheers - 67.41.162.222 05:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for giving me that link over to the IP Edits Are Not Anonymous page. While I have been thinking of joining, all I'd be doing is correcting grammar, typos, and such on pages, not substantial rewrites of pages, as I am doing more-or-less anonymously. Anyway, thanks for the reply and the helpful link! 71.35.232.177 01:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. The IP address has changed again, but it is me. If you want to reply, please do it on the 67.xx.xx... talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.232.177 (talk) 01:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

As a somewhat belated reply (apologies), but Wikipedia certainly does need users to make it "feel" like an encyclopedia. New content and expansion is excellent, but at Wikipedia's current mass, improving existing content (through grammar, typos, etc.) is just an admirable task. There's no harm in registering an account to do it, either :) Gracenotes^T § 15:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've taken up your advice. I joined about a month ago. I just now remembered you were the one that encouraged me to join! Thanks, and no problem for the late reply. Cheers - Ανέκδοτο 03:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

In response to your response to my question on talk:wikipedia:

Thank you for your thoughtful and professional answer. It seems that you're either an experienced wikipedian or a administrator. Anyways, thanks for your answer and that certainly did encourage me to be bold. Good day.

PS your talk page is really beautiful.

Kniito 05:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

As yet the page hasn't had development so things haven't developed. But when all the films are added the template will link decades together. Please see Template:Israelifilmlist now for the eventual idea ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 17:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Well its not just Japan. The entire lists including UK, France, SPain, Italy, Portugal, Brazil, Argentina, China, Hong Kong etc have this naming convention. Only the US has American films of 1936 etc. Before I considered renaming them all e.g Israeli films of the 1980s etc. What do you think? Eventually they'll be more than just lists won't they ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 09:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I would be willing to move the pages to e.g Argentine films of the 1970s etc. I agree this naming system is more appropriate for the encyclopedia as these pages indeed are encyclopedic not just lists. See List of British films. This is more developed. Hopefully the Israeli as with all world countries will have pages like this soon enough ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 09:57, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

You had asked, on User talk:Gurch, which software Gurch had used to make his ads. He's away indefinitely (not for the moment, as his talk page claims), but I recall that he used Adobe ImageReady. Unfortunately, the software was discontinued (Adobe now develops Adobe Fireworks, which costs approximately US$300) shortly after he started creating the ads. The two events were not related, I assume ;) Gracenotes^T § 03:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Thanks for the answer! :-D —Remember the dot ^(talk) 03:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello. It is I, Mayfare again. I have followed your advice. However, where should I type my secret string? If I type it after User Committed Identity, then the secret string will be exposed to the public. Thank you very much. --Mayfare 20:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my idiotic question. I guess that I should actually type my hash sum after User Committed Identity not my unencrypted secret string, right? Where could I get a software to make cryptographic hash functions like WHIRLPOOL? Thanks. --Mayfare 00:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Realistically, how long do you think it'll be till WP:TS is ready to implement? I'm all for starting now, but you guys seem to be debating on code. Having a look over Wikipedia:Template messages#Article-related namespace, there are literally thousands of article-space templates out there. For coding novices like myself who love this idea (and it seems I am far from alone), would it be possible to draw up an easy-to-use instruction manual for converting templates? (Say, at Wikipedia:Template standardisation/Instructions for implementation) As it would very much be in the spirit of the movement if everyone was standardising through the same method. — Jack · talk · 04:54, Monday, 3 September 2007

Per a previous discussion plus he originally created the merge section templates, i have notified User:David Levy about the "too many sections" templates TfD. Simply south 21:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

All right. Thank you for notifying him, and notifying me about notifying him—that's very considerate of you. Gracenotes^T § 21:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I have followed up on the suggestion i made but i feel the way i have worded it sonds still a bit POV. It was just a quick one and adapted from Samsara's. See User:Simply south/Condense-section. I have not moved it yet. Simply south 21:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

What is the regex you use to find images in a page? Alpta 16:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. Those templates are specific to chronological or time-line lack of references, unlike the general ones. Therefore are indicating to the editors precisely what they must look for, not just references but to verify dates and time-lines.

The templates have been well received in all articles where we placed those and the editors showed fast compliance so the templates are working well in their purpose and speed up historical referencing by narrowing the focus to what exactly needs reference.

The placement on talk pages didn't yield results and was ignored so we started to follow the same strategy than other projects and placing them in the main article. We also have developed small templates which don't disturb the main appearance of the article and are placed at the footnotes. I hope this clarifies your doubts, thank you for your suggestions. Daoken 07:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Further to the above explanation and addressing your concern, the guidelines were adapted following the concern presented . See WP:TIMETGD Daoken 08:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

"Reliable" could awake some controversy and debate about how reliable is a given source. But it can be for example "historical/timeline specific sources" or "timeline confirming references/sources". Do you have any suggestion?

About your other question, a simplified view is:

a) an article describes dates and facts happening at one point in time but fails to source those claims, or

b) an article describes its subject but fails to describe its history or development timeline, or

c) an article claims a lineage but fails to source that claim.

The article's editors then must, in case:

a) insert sources for verification of those claims, or in case

b) provide a well sourced history or timeline of the article's subject, or in case

c) insert sources that verify the claims.

You may go to WP:TIMETST and search the categories for seeing some examples of how articles were improved.

At this point, with thanks for your input, after trying to integrate your suggestions, and said in a most friendly way, it could be most interesting to know how you came to be interested in our project. I see that your interest is not enough for joining but nevertheless you show remarkable interest in the details of the project. I hope you can clarify my doubts. Thank you again for your most useful suggestions.Daoken 08:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

After some thinking, perhaps "sources for chronology/history verification" ? Is this sounding more accessible? Daoken 15:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Please take another look at the Tfd for Template:Visitor attractions in New York City. I've updated the template based on the comments. Thanks dm 00:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Grace,

I believe the arrangement I made on the article of mr. Hammarskjold is satisfactory. It follows according to the previous sentence and makes the reader aware of the allegation. Trajectories have to be found with a profound rigour, and the vectors are inspiring. Yours, Fabio Damascus Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.20.250.51 (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

– 86.149.8.81 22:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, forgive me for this, but I don't know anyone else I can turn to, and I have more ambitions than my command over the codes. This has, really, not much to do with the main body of Wikipedia, but I'll be much indebted if you could help. Here's what I I want and can't get done on my own -

• I'm looking for ways to have the icons equally spaced at User:Aditya Kabir/archiveheader, it can be done I know, but I wonder how.
• I have no clue why the TOC links stop working after 21.16 User talk:Aditya Kabir/Archive 5. Have I done something seriously wrong?

Sorry to bother you, but it would really help if you could lend me some directions. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks. The archive header looks just wonderful. But, archive 5 is still the same, almost. I wonder what my problem is. Bandwith? I have very little of that, and I can't think up any other reason. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 01:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Since I don't understand your answer, I've clarified my question on the Wikipedia talk:Special:Categories Page.

It involves the Bar & Space after "Zion." Please go back and clarify your answer to my Query. Thanks. --Ludvikus 17:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm...the reply script is now asking me for the section name twice. I looked at the code...and I see this part:

var sectionName = prompt("What is the section name? (Leave blank to omit.)", "");
       if (sectionName == null)
           return;
       var sectionName = prompt("What is the section name? (Leave blank to omit.)", "");

I can kind of read code, so I'm guessing it's taking all my section names as null for some reason. One I get the second prompt it works after that. Thanks, --(Review Me) R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 11:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep. Remove the fourth line (which is an accidental repeat of the first line). Not sure how that got there... Gracenotes^T § 15:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Created the section Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Subpage_of_Elaragirl: at WP:AN, and since it involves you somewhat, I thought you might like to know. Cheers, Spawn Man 08:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Woah - Had no idea that you were a guy... Sorry, but this has happened to many times before (I thought Sango123 was a boy, and who knew a user called Cremepuff would be a boy?). Sorry for the whole AN thingy; I didn't know you two were friends, nor that you were a guy. My mistake - I was just looking out for another editor. Sorry. Anyway, hopefully we can meet again under better circumstances. Cheers, :) Spawn Man 02:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Are we ready to continue with the deletion of the "Latest preview" / "Latest release" templates? --MZMcBride 19:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I've made/run a script to create a list with all the templates and their usages. It (clarification: the list 04:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)) can be seen here. It seems like outside of the individual software articles, the templates are used in comparison software articles (e.g. Comparison of web browsers)—which may be a reason not to nominate them, as they might be useful in those articles. Do you have any thoughts on this? Gracenotes^T § 04:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow response. It seems some of the templates may be useful, however, some, like Template:Latest stable release/Mint are not used. I think the templates that are not being used should be deleted (possibly via WP:DOT?). Templates like /Mint truly aren't necessary. Thoughts? --MZMcBride 03:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from using vulgar terminology in your edit summaries. Thanks. Haha. the_undertow ^talk 21:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry; I'll use "large intestine" in the future. Gracenotes^T § 21:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm okay with that. the_undertow ^talk 21:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt help. You addressed all my concerns, and I understood everything <that's a first, for a techno-fool like myself!>. The bit about Media wiki "poem" and "blockquote" has revolutionised things for me.

Cheers. Are you an Admin, by the way? --FClef (talk) 20:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

My attempt to move "National Technical Means of Verification" to "National Means of Technical Verification" was rejected, apparently because there is already a stub article "National Technical Means". I'd propose that the latter article merge into the new one, at the same time correcting the common misconception that this is simply a euphemism of reconnaissance satellites. As my fairly extensive discussion of non-satellite MASINT techniques shows, there is much more to verification. Indeed, I probably should have added some satellite systems that are not reconnaissance in the usual definition, such as the VELA program and its successors. Howard C. Berkowitz 04:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi^(t|c|b|cn) 02:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching those; don't know why I spaced on the proper formatting for that template! --Orange Mike 13:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you edit a page, you will be shot – Gurch 01:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

New York City Meetup Next: Saturday November 3rd, Brooklyn Museum area Last: 8/12/2007 This box: view • talk •

The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a Wikimedia New York City local chapter. Hope to see you there!

Hi Gracenotes. I made a humour template slightly similar to yours (which is brilliant, by the way) at Template:Owner, which is up for deletion. Based on the reason given yours might be nominated too. I'm not too familiar with the local Wikipedia-humour customs myself, but I thought I'd let you know. Richard001 04:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, Richard001 having been so kind as to point out this template's existence, I have nominated it too. In my opinion the template namespace is part of the encyclopedia, and no less sacred to attempts at humour than the article namespace. Humour should be kept in the Wikipedia namespace, if kept at all. Hesperian 11:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

:-( – Gurch 18:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)