User talk:TeleComNasSprVen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

T: template redirects[edit]

Hi, you participated in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 29#T:, some of which I have relisted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November_18#T:WPTECH. Please come along and share your thoughts .. ;-) John Vandenberg (chat) 15:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Ah sorry, I just noticed this letter in my email today. Unfortunately if you have noticed I have not participated in any Wikipedia activities since almost three years ago, so I may be a little rusty at this. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 21:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
I notified everyone who I saw was active somewhere; in your case it was on English Wiktionary. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this matter, and good to see you back here. Regards, John Vandenberg (chat) 03:26, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Article subpages[edit]

Hi. I was browsing your contributions, and I noticed that you created Ipse dixit/Archive (Bare assertion fallacy) and Flo Rida/Archive 1. Would you explain your reasoning? I can think of two possible reasons: convenience when navigating from the corresponding talk archive or preventing G8 speedy deletion, although talk page archives are already exempt. I was under the impression that these "subpages" (actually disabled in article space) should not be created, although I didn't find a prohibition in WP:Subpages. Flatscan (talk) 05:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for inquiring. Yes, I had both of those reasons in mind when I added the new redirects, and I'd forgotten the subpage system is not recognized by the MediaWiki software for the mainspace; I'd simply clicked on the corresponding link from the talk archives and redirect myself up one level, so to speak. Though perhaps, on having better thought of it, these things would be treated as articles and simply take up more room in the mainspace when they shouldn't be (inflating PAGECOUNT and/or ARTICLECOUNT etc), and my stance is usually against that stuff anyway, sort of like the pseudo-namespace issue. Anyway, and not just for my own sake of remembering, I'd like to see more clear policies about this, discouraging creation of such redirects, maybe written into Wikipedia:Redirect. This is good material for seeking wider discussion (RFC, VPR, etc). I'm considering deleting them for that but they are somewhat useful in navigating articlespace. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 05:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Unrelated note: Archiving your talkpage is good practice as it makes it easier to follow your discussions and loads the page quicker for the less technologically inclined. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 05:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response and G7-ing the pages. WT:Redirect seems like the best place, with notifications at WT:Subpages and WP:Village pump (policy) per WP:Publicising discussions. I prefer the specific page over the village pumps due to the relative ease of finding old discussions and not having to worry about short auto-archiving. (I see your pseudo-namespace RfC at VPP.) Regarding my talk page, I have put archiving on my to-do list, but I came across a very old discussion that needs investigation. Flatscan (talk) 05:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Editor review[edit]

Hello TeleComNasSprVen. Just wanted to drop a note to thank you for the review you left. I am grateful for the time you took to examine and put together your observations. I haven't been editing much lately, but your notes will be taken to heart when I am back. Happy Editing. Yazan (talk) 14:03, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:ER[edit]

Can you review my one please? Soham (talk) 08:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Civilization IV, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Raze, Queue and Pros and cons (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) 09:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Civilization IV[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Civilization IV you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Darkwarriorblake -- Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Concerning That Category Spamming IP[edit]

The Indonesian vandal currently as 36.74.205.62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · edit filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is either totally and completely incapable of, or lacks all desire to communicate in any way with other editors. So far, the way I and other users, like User:Fama Clamosa, deal with it is to revert everything it does, and get its current IP anon-blocked.--Mr Fink (talk) 16:37, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind for my future reports. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 19:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

r from plural is restricted to mainspace[edit]

Just to let you know that I changed the redirect template on Help:Conditional expressions because {{r from plural}} is only allowed in the main namespace.

You probably wouldn't have noticed this without checking the relevant category because the official MediaWiki preview function doesn't currently preview templates on redirects. (User:Js/ajaxPreview, however, does.)

Should we consider removing the namespace restrictions on the r from/to plural templates or creating new "r from/to plural in non-main namespace" templates? (Sorry if you're not the best person to talk to on this - who might be able to help better? I tried starting discussion on the former when I encountered this issue previously, but I didn't get much of a response due to the poor wording of my question.) --SoledadKabocha (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant Help:Conditional expression and {{r to plural}} (doc). --SoledadKabocha (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Sure, I'll ask around at relevant forums like the Wikipedia:Village pump. But yeah I didn't know anything about this so I'm not the best person to talk to. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 18:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Alright, so I asked around the village pump and here is the thread telling me that they use a template to check if something is in the main namespace or not and that if I want to change the way the R-template series works I'd have to propose changes to how the |main category= code for the template works. But I've also found another alternative that we could use to categorize such redirects in the meantime, {{R to help namespace}}. If you want to start up discussion about this let me know, but I think the {{R to help namespace}} template will solve this problem for the time being. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 01:32, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Glad youre back. Do you remember me? Soap 13:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Civilization IV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1UP (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) 09:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned templates[edit]

Hello. Thank you for removing "deprecated" as a speedy criteria. You say there is no consensus that orphaned should not be a speedy criteria. I had another look, and I see 5 in favor and one making a joke. Perhaps you could have a look again, or explain to me what I am missing. You may post here, I'll watch your talk page. Debresser (talk) 12:40, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Kephir doesn't seem to support the removal of the orphaned template yet, but he may change his mind. Consensus has been pretty clear though for removal of {{db-deprecated}}. Maybe we could ask him to just use G6 (general maintenance) as a speedy tag in the future. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 03:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Three editors posted below him and disagree, and two others in other places in the discussion. And even he doesn't seem to be seriously opposed, just would prefer to have a speedy alternative to Tfd for orphaned templates. Debresser (talk) 10:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

AN[edit]

Hi,

It looks like you've posted twice you latest !vote on AN. Someone not using his real name (talk) 06:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I've just noticed that; I guess MediaWiki's being slow again... TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 06:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Derp (hacker group), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Twitch (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) 09:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Civilization IV[edit]

The article Civilization IV you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol unsupport vote.svg; see Talk:Civilization IV for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Darkwarriorblake -- Darkwarriorblake (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Cosmo Wright[edit]

Hi TCNSPV, you recently detagged the Cosmo wright speedrunner article on the basis that he is a record holder. Firstly, I'm not sure that his record counts. It doesn't appear to be ratified by Guinness, for instance, which I would assume is the usual arbiter in this case? Secondly, the page's author and assorted associates are now attempting to use that article as a wedge to include other speedrunner articles (e.g. Werster) "because other speedrunners have wikis". danno_uk 03:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for contacting me. I detagged the article on the grounds that it does satisfy WP:CSD#A7 which states: "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant...may be deleted under this criteria." However, because the article clearly stated that the subject held "the world record for the fastest time completing [various games]" it therefore does not fall under the purview of A7. Whether or not his record counts is only relevant to notability; to satisfy the 'claim of significance' criteria, which is a different standard and much lower than notability, all an article has to do is make a claim that the subject is significant in some way, without needing to justify that significance. As I explained to the creator of the article, it may still be deleted due to lack of sourcing to prove its notability. If you wish, you may take it to WP:AFD or use WP:PROD for it. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 03:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Rollback and reviewer userights granted[edit]

Hello TeleComNasSprVen. Your account has been granted the "rollback" and "reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.

Rollback user right
Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg
Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
Reviewer user right
Wikipedia Reviewer.svg
The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 09:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Turkish Wikimedia chapter wiki[edit]

I should probably email Vito Genovese about this matter too, though he's been inactive since September of 2013 but I wanted to ask you whether or not you plan on participating any longer in the chapter wiki or that we should leave it up to the stewards to handle requests. Basically, in this edit a fellow steward told me to leave it up to the heads of the chapter wiki, but I do not know exactly who the founder is and whether he/she has the time to manage and take care of the wiki, so instead I have to write to the system-operators of that wiki. Oh by the way, that comment in the thread was regarding this userpage which appeared to be spam, though again I leave it up to your judgments. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 17:09, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I deleted that specific page as it was spam (self promotion; potential BLP-vio), I have been quite busy with real-world affairs (mainly my thesis which seems to drag on). Thank you for notifying me though. The wiki and the progress of the chapter isn't ideal but I think both needs time. That said we may wish for an "approval" type registration for the wiki assuming the community approves or perhaps that may be counter productive. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 08:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
@とある白い猫: Sorry for bothering you again, but I think some more spam reappeared on the wiki after that last deletion. Since you seem really busy, do you think you could transfer sysop controls over to me/trwiki admin/global sysop/anyone else that you may trust, so that we can maintain the spam while you're gone? TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 23:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
I am right here, I will monitor the site closer as I am done with my work as of 28 February 2014. That said, I do not mind any help but it is not like the site is seeing an overwhelming attack at the moment. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 00:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep the page watchlisted and read it over but no promises on me commenting, I'm quite busy IRL and on other Wikimedia projects. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 09:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Faritz Abdul Hameed[edit]

You certainly would have been within your rights to BLPPROD, but a better way is to try and find a source yourself, as I have done, which shows notability per WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 10:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

updated since my last visit[edit]

what is this "updated since my last visit" in green that's started to appear on History pages? What makes it happen, and what's the point? It appears next to your recent edit on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). —Anomalocaris (talk) 07:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I think that that message simply shows the number of changes by revision entries starting from your last visit to the page. For example, if you viewed Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) as it appears on revision 595055757 (found at the top in the URL field) you will see that it has this message: "This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anomalocaris (talk | contribs) at 15:42, 11 February 2014." Now if you closed the tab or window on the page, it will record the changes by revisions that have appeared since you last viewed that revision, so revisions 595059316 and 595106424 will have the green bar highlighted next to them. Perhaps this should be better documented somewhere at Help:Page history, but you can always ask some of the more technically minded people hanging around Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) to help explain it to you better. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 09:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Your shared-account RFC[edit]

I have some ideas about this. Where would you like them: on its talk page, or at WP:VPI? JohnCD (talk) 21:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

You can modify the document directly and note the changes at VPI. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 21:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

FrescoBot on Commons[edit]

The bot is back. ;) I updated also the Commons script and I had test it. It took a while, but now it is running. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 08:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 09:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Neutral point of view (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) 09:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

wm2013:[edit]

There's already bugzilla:59157. Deryck C. 14:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep that watchlisted from my bugzilla account. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 14:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

You have a message at Simple English Wikipedia[edit]

Please check simple:User talk:TeleComNasSprVen#Please change your signature and reply there. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 06:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The "Spiral of silence" diagram[edit]

"File:TR spiral-of-silence-communication-theory.jpg" → Thank you very much indeed for your endeavour. I know that there is still a gesture of goodwill in the community. --Toksoz (talk) 17:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Your 'Speedy Deletion Request' on cy wiki[edit]

I've left you a message on cy wp regarding your request. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 05:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

AUM Schematic[edit]

Thanks for your response over at your talk page on wikimedia commons, I'm a little confused about the way you worded it though. Were you referring ot the original verion of the diagram from the anxiety/uncertainty management pdf? If necessary it'd be fine to use that, I guess. The issue is mostly an aesthetic one from my perspective, I'd hate to be forced to use a low quality, poorly-designed diagram in place of an updated one. What if I were to copy the diagram exactly and declare that it isn't my work? Forgive me for the hassle, I'm new to this and I'm eager to do things through the proper channels, I just don't want to sacrifice article quality wherever possible. Kaolincash (talk) 12:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I think the SVG rendering may be better than the original enough that it does not warrant copyright violation anymore. As such I've pulled the tag. So it's mostly my fault, sorry for the confusion! Basically for copyright law, you want to minimize how close something looks like to another thing, otherwise it looks close to plagiarism. But the SVG might not be the case. If you're still worried about deletion, we can keep a local copy on English Wikipedia just in case. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 12:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks! I uploaded a second version just now which is altered a little more (I cleaned up the text, which wasn't rendering well for me, and changed some of the phrasing). Take care, thanks again for your help. Kaolincash (talk) 12:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, TeleComNasSprVen. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 06:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Treaty merger[edit]

I'm looking over it now. It was a pretty sloppily executed merger, to be honest -- duplicated categories, reuse of the same photo that appears in the Accession of Crimea to the Russian Federation infobox already, and totally redundant information on the treaty already covered in the Timeline section of the article merged to. As the editor who created the treaty page to begin with, I'm not seeing anything from that article that hasn't been incorporated into the accession page aside from the Wikisource link, and that's easy enough to rectify. If there's something I am missing, please advise. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

FYI, policy is not Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth, only verifiability (and truth is ok!)[edit]

Was reading: [1]. Might not matter much there but Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth is an essay about the previous policy (there was a controversy and it was changed). I better be right about this as I changed [[2]] to be in sync with English Wikipedia.. comp.arch (talk) 00:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

If you think so, but it is only an essay. My take on it is that the "truth" is whatever Wikipedia's sources say, not what you think the truth might be. As example, if ten different reliable sources or news stations report that the sky is green, and you think the sky is blue, ultimately Wikipedia will say the sky is green. (There are also complications when Wikipedia's sources cite Wikipedia itself, creating a circular self-reference and thereby creating a "new" truth. We tend to try to avoid those.) TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 00:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
It'n not only what I think. This is the policy Wikipedia:Verifiability, see note one below. What is true about the essay and previous policy is that the truth is a high bar for many people and would create fear in people about including stuff. But it could also be misunderstood to mean if it's verifiable it doesn't have to be true. Now if stuff is verifiable but turns out to be untrue, I assume that source can be taken out as it is not reliable. comp.arch (talk) 14:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wditor Review[edit]

Hey. Thanks for the review and the kind words. I am thinking of being active again, not sure where to start! --HarshAJ (Talk)(Contribs) 15:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

[edit]

Why did you replace my upload of the "EXACT" same thing? Without telling my why and leaving a notice for the "orphaned image" on my talk page? You may be busy in real life but you have no problems completely eliminating my contributions to Wikipedia. --Kmg90 (talk) 17:50, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I am confused by what you are trying to say. If your image was deleted, it was probably because it was replaceable non-free media or it was uploaded as a lower resolution version of the original image. According to Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, such non-free images whereby a free equivalent exists and can easily replace, may be subject to deletion. I've poked around your logs and I think that with the Disqus logo, you may want to discuss this with the deleting administrator TLSuda. TeleComNasSprVen (talkcontribs) 04:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
@Kmg90: The image was correctly switched out with a version of the logo which was on Wikimedia Commons (our media repository). We do not need duplicate copies of images or logos, so the version that you uploaded was deleted. Because your version was marked as non-free, the easiest way to process was to deleted it as an orphaned non-free image, although it could have been just as easily speedy deleted as a duplicate image. This is the reason for the notice on your talk page, so that you would be aware of the pending deletion and could resolve any issues.
As a side note, none of your contributions have been "eliminated," rather, all that happened was a differently-named logo was swapped out. If you have any further questions or issues, feel free to bring it to my talk page and I will be happy to work with you. Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 21:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Tàu listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tàu. Since you had some involvement with the Tàu redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 03:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Procession Under Tuma - Joey L.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Procession Under Tuma - Joey L.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:51, 20 June 2014 (UTC)