User talk:Dgies

Stress concentration in champagne bottles

I respectfully disagree I need a citation for the 30% strength calculation. An engineer with a Bachelors in Mechanical will be able to do this calculation. Stress concentrations are a well understood fenomena. Frank van Mierlo 23:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Below is a short introduction: Basic stress analysis calculations assume that the components are smooth with no irregularities.

In practice, many engineering components have changes in section and / or shape. Common examples are shoulders on shafts, oil holes, key ways and screw threads. A champagne battle is a lot like a shoulder on a shaft. Any discontinuity changes the stress distribution which causes local increase of stress referred to as stress concentration.

The stress concentration factor Kt is used to relate the actual maximum stress at the discontinuity to the nominal stress.

Kt = max direct stress / nominal direct stress

In information relating to stress concentration values care needs to be taken that the correct nominal stress is used.

The subscript 't' indicates that the stress concentration value is a theoretical calculation based only on the geometry of the component and discontinuity.

Some materials are not as sensitive to notches as implied by the theoretical stress concentration factor. For these materials a reduced value of Kt is used: Kf. In these materials the maximum stress is:

max. stress = Kf x nominal stress

The notch sensitivity, q, is defined as: q = (Kf - 1) / (Kt - 1) where q is between 0 and 1.

This equation shows that if q = 0, then Kf = 1 as the material has no sensitivity to notches. If q = 1, then Kf = Kt and the material is fully notch sensitive.

When designing, a frequent procedure is to first find Kt from the geometry of the component, then specify the material and look up the notch sensitivity, q, for the notch radius from a chart. Then by rearranging the above equation, determine Kf. Kf = 1 + q(Kt - 1).

Glass not being very ductile is very sensitive to stress concentrations.

Frank van Mierlo 04:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't dispute that the rim is a weak point because of seams and stress concentrations at the notch. The problem is that you are quantifying that weakness without any citation, and in fact the equations you offer only demonstrate that notch sensitivity represents a reduction in strength relative to the regular elastic limit. They don't quantify the weakness so you just claim that q=0.7 and apply that without providing any evidence. You might be right, but you can't jump to conclusions without providing evidenct or citations. —Dgies^t c 05:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You make several good points, are you an engineeer? Frank van Mierlo 23:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

My degree was in physics. Also, note that I have moved your comment so that the thread of conversation is more readable. —Dgies^t c 00:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:What is a featured picture?

Have updated the survey, containing all similar pages, perhaps you want to change your "vote"? _→AzaToth 00:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppet

I note you recently blocked an IP vandal under suspicion it was the same user. I think you were right, as I outlined here. Looks like someone's got a vendetta against Wikipedia. -- Kesh 02:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I marked them as sockpuppets on their talk pages and added them to the list, but I'm not an admin and haven't blocked anybody. —Dgies^t c 03:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! An admin already blocked those accounts, I was just wondering how to mark them as potential socks of Cplot, since that's what they look like. Appreciate the help! -- Kesh 03:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Village pump thread

I've replied on my talk page. --tjstrf talk 20:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Blocking 170.161.70.98

Actually, it is a soft block, which I denoted with "AO" (anonymous only). Thanks for watching out, though. --Kukini 01:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I reverted the editing of spam act beforehand. --Naohiro19(Talk Page/Contributions) 17:05, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Washington monument FPC

I've just gotten around to closing the Washington Monument nomination, but I need some more information on which version to promote. You opposed the original image due to the duplicate people. An edit has been created which removes this issue, so I was wondering whether this would change your opinion? Raven4x4x 07:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• Still not really in favor of either version, but if it's getting promoted, I'll take the edited one. —Dgies^t c 08:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image:George W. Bush public opinion polling.png

I tried to upload an svg version a while ago, but I'm unfamiliar with the format and the resulting file was corrupted. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

anon nuking tons of ELs and ignoring talk page warnings

I noticed that you reverted many of his edits. Thank you for that! Did you check all of them? — Sebastian 13:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I reverted all which were the most recent change and didn't seem to make any other significant (helpful) change. This was probably 80% or so of the spree. —Dgies^t c 16:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Sebastian has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks a lot for your effort! — Sebastian 03:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Timbaland

After you deleted it claiming slashdot is not a RS, the same user that put it in, User:O^O put it back in. I have since deleted and if he does it again, I plan to report him for the 3RR rule. I think we may need to get an arbutitrayer (? I hope you know what I mean) on this, but I think no artist official comment, not Wikipedian worthy.--WhereAmI 22:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

He edited in again, this time with a small translation.--WhereAmI 22:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it. That translation is completely inadequate for judging whether not this as a RS. If could just be some Finnish site saying "this was posted to digg". I have left him a 3RR warning. If he does it again, you can request a 24 hour block at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. —Dgies^t c 22:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

My take

I'm not O_O, but I came to this site to write my own article. If I create a website with all the files (including the cross-mixes) permanently available, will you leave the link intact? It's important information, and it's not the wikipedia thing to do to remove such. It's an ongoing controversy, and thousands of people are aware. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.68.80.219 (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

What you're basically asking (translated into Wiki-ese) is: "If I publish a site of my own original research, making allegations against a real living person, can I cite that in their article?" There are several problems with this: Original research is not allowed on Wikipedia, so posting it on a 3rd party site and linking to it brings up the question of reliable sources. You may be acting in good faith, and not attempting to deceive, but you personally are not considered a reliable source for the purpose of citing in an article unless you are a noted expert in music copyright infringement. Furthermore, the biographies of living persons policy says we must have very high standards of proof for posting allegations against living persons. If the allegations are true, better sources will eventually come into existence. Until then, please just wait. —Dgies^t c 00:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The research posted was published on the YouTube site. That is not an example of "original research". ebeeson

It is the original research of whoever made the video. And because they are not a recognized copyright expert or a first party to the dispute, they do not meet the definition of a "reliable source". —Dgies^t c 03:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Why do you get to define the rules of what research is valid and what is not? Are you enough of an expert in music copyright infringement to say who's work in that field is allowed on Wikipedia? ebeeson

We should follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. They suggest research should either be "Scholarly", as in published in a academic journal, or if "Non-Scholarly", should demonstrate expertise and editorial oversight. YouTube is zero editorial oversight, and I have seen no claims that the person who made the video is an expert in the field. —Dgies^t c 03:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070119-8659.html Is this on the master list of "wiki approved sources"? Where can I find a copy of the approved sources list? ebeeson

There's no "master list". Editors are simply expected to exercise good judgment. Think about it as if you were writing an academic paper on the subject: What sources would you feel confident citing? A blog? An IRC transcript? Look for sources which have editorial oversight and some expertise in the field. Is this explanation satisfactory to you? —Dgies^t c 07:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it's not. Because facts are facts, it doesn't matter the source, as long as they're true. ebeeson

Maybe you should sit down and really read WP:V and WP:RS. Something can be an absolutely true fact, but if it can't be verified by a reliable source, it's still just one editor's word against another's. Truth is the goal, but reliable sources are the Wikipedia way of making sure we're getting truth and not rumor. —Dgies^t c 17:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Humorously named people

I noticed that the Category you created, "Humorously named people", is likely headed for deletion. I understand that categories like this take quite some time to develop and flesh out, yet this particular one appears to be unwelcome at Wikipedia, unless I'm misunderstanding the argument. I hope that you will continue your work here at Wikipedia. However, just so you know, there are also other wikis out there that might very well welcome such a Category project as yours. You might start by looking at Wikia.com, Centiare.com, or PBwiki.com. If you feel that this message is too spammy, you are welcome to delete it from your discussion page. --JossBuckle Swami 13:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern, but I'm a fairly experienced editor and a veteran of the XfD process so I won't take it too personally. —Dgies^t c 15:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Original post

Hey man, it's just that the "Phat Phuc Noodle Bar" image is being questioned, and since it is such a perfect image, I wanted to deflect attention from it. I'll make you a deal - we'll restore the "What the pho?" restaurants in two days if you go onto the talk page and vote in support of keeping the image. Or not. But come on, help me out!

Anyway, uncool thing to do, sorry for that. Zweifel 07:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

AAAh -- okay, I'll cut and paste this onto my talk page.Zweifel 07:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Attacks

Please do not make personal attacks on other people or bots as you did on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

From User talk:Cbrown1023

A bot is not a person, so I think it's entirely reasonable to call it dumb when it does something dumb, like archive a request as "completed" when it fails to comprehend the logic in the request. I know all about WP:NPA and I was quite polite on the bot author's page. I don't think WP:NPA applies to things which are not persons. Am I missing something?

Oh come on! I think calling a bot (which made a mistake) dumb is pretty reasonable. A bot is not a person! —Dgies^t c 23:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Imagine a newbie coming by and seeing that, what would they think? How are they supposed to know bots are not really people? Calling a bot stupid is like calling its creator stupid becasue it is created and maintained by them, if you comment about the bot, you also comment about the creator. You should, as a good editor, set an example for new and existings users. If you know all about WP:NPA, then you should know "comment on the content, not on the contributor", that was a violation of it, no matter who it was directed towards. Cbrown1023 23:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I will readily admit it's not setting a good example for new users. But the bot's name is VoABot so it should be obvious I was not talking to a person. Also, a bot is just source code, which is content, so saying a bot is dumb is tantamount to saying there is an error in it's code/content. If you had just said "Don't be rude to bots, it'll give newbies the wrong idea", this would be a non-issue, but you left a template warning about no personal attacks, which suggested to me that you didn't really understand the situation and left me feeling attacked. —Dgies^t c 00:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

RFP

Well, admin backlogs are shown when we (admins) look at our watchlist. If you really want admin attention, go to WP:AN, and you'll probably find a few people who will take care of the situation fast.

By the way, we know VoABot is not perfect, and it does mistakenly archive some unprocessed requests. That's why I usually go back and check the whole page to see if all requests have been processed, just in case the bot made a mistake. Nishkid64 17:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Assistance required

Could you please help me out with this template I am trying to create? What I want to do is to make all the fields (except for {{{name}}}) optional; that is if a parameter is left blank its table row does not appear.

I've been trying this for days, but for some reason whenever two or more parameters beneath each other are left blank when it is called, the whole table stretches out and looks ugly. This has got me stumped. The template in question is at User:Wykebjs/Sandbox.

If you can find the time to help I would be very thankful. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 22:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I made the change you requested for the "other_names" parameter to User:Wykebjs/Sandbox2. You should be able to do the rest. —Dgies^t c 22:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Dgies, although the stretching cells problem hasn't gone. If you look at the template now, you will see the same kind of problem I've been having.

When {{{population_total}}} and {{{population_density}}}, two parameters adjacent to each other, are left blank then the cells get stretched taller. It gets worse when three or more adjacent fields are blank.

Hopefully you'll be able to see what I'm doing wrong. Thanks again. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 22:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

NM, got it fixed now. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 23:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs ScatterTones TransGaming Technologies Astronomical year numbering Crop (anatomy) Canis Unwins Fart Luke Covell WCWM Playboy Caribbean Sea Juice Carrier pigeon Dander Skye Terrier Microorganism Square kilometre Table wine Comeback

Cleanup Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad M16 rifle Gene therapy Merge Tonalpohualli Fighting Street Supernet Add Sources Cook Islands KFC Chicken nugget Wikify College rugby Education in North Korea Harchester United F.C. Expand Flea Basket weaving SpeedStep

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Skyview High School

I'll say that while Skyview High School (Thornton, Colorado) seems to be relatively non-notable despite everyone's best efforts to prove notability, you have quite an uphill battle in regards to it since it's a school. In fact, I don't know if you're aware of it or not, but Skyview was the subject of an AfD last May, which resulted in a result of "keep". Good luck to you in pursuing deletion of a somewhat controversial article that (in my opinion) needs to be put out of its misery, but I don't see it happening. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Personal user information

Can you remove the information from his edit history also, considering the age? KP Botany 00:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

That's much harder. There are many revisions with this info, and "removing" a previous edit (as opposed to simply reverting) requires "oversight" permission, of which there are only a handful of users. I will explain the issue at WP:ANI and let them worry about it. —Dgies^t c 01:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for catching it and being concerned. KP Botany 02:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Modifying my comments?

Wow. I honestly have no idea how that happened. I can see how that would be hard to believe. All I was doing was endorsing a comment. I see that you also made that same typo and you changed it from deleted to restored at 16:49 (my time), which is the same time I edited the page. I did not get an edit conflict so I'm guessing it was a glitch with the MediaWiki software. Sorry for the confusion. And honestly, I don't appreciate the accusational tone but I'm hoping I was able to clear the issue.↔NMajdan•talk 23:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I hope my explanation sounds plausible as it is the best I have.↔NMajdan•talk 03:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bear McCreary.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bear McCreary.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 15:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Rei-bot

Hi,

The reason in this edition, is not a mistake of the bot. It de:Seelöwe is a disambig and the en:Sea Lion isn't, for this motive m:pywikipediabot it removed the interwiki, they are not the similar.--Rei-artur 19:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Inequality with standards of articles

I submitted an article for review about a current USC basketball player, Dwight Lewis, a few days ago. There are other pages on current USC basketball players on Wikipedia. I wonder why mine was rejected on the basis of notability and not being in the NBA when the others are up on Wikipedia--the comments said to resubmit his entry if he goes to the NBA. This seems inconsistent. Perhaps you should review your standards or set some bar that is more uniform?

Ashleyatusc 05:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't make the standards and while I try to be knowledgeable about notability standards in general, I'm not as familiar with them as applied to athletes. The relevant guideline I applied was:

"Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable, including college sports in the United States."

Since basketball is not a non-league or "mainly amateur" sport, I applied the first criteria: "played in a fully professional league". If you believe my judgment was incorrect, feel free to get a second opinion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball. Also: be aware that the mere existence of an article on a college basketball player does not mean all college basketball player articles are OK. It may simply be an article that should be deleted if taken to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. —Dgies^t c 23:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand that you were applying those standards, however, I would ask you to consider that major college athletics such as football and basketball, while one step below professional leagues, are considered just as significant in sports culture as their professional counterparts. As a sportswriter (I wrote for the Daily Trojan in college, and I have worked for The Acorn and FOXSports.com) I can say this from experience. I would like to bring to attention the two other articles about current USC basketball players and one about a man who is unfortunately no longer with us, as well as a few articles about players from other traditionally strong basketball schools that I feel justify the inclusion of my article.

Ex. 1 Gabe Pruitt: Pruitt is one of the trio of leaders on the USC basketball team and has ranked among the Trojan elite. He will be NBA-bound, likely this year or next (next year if his dad has anything to do with it). This article, while not updated with Pruitt's stats since returning from his academic ineligibility, shows stats and personal information to enhance the breadth of reporting.

Ex. 2 Nick Young (basketball player): I am not sure if you know who Young is, but he is a dynamic player also destined for the NBA. The Trojans' star player--leading scorer and so forth--he is in constant contention for accolades. Yet his article is but a stub, without depth or information that is more descriptive than a name and position. I might update this myself, once I figure out this technology.

Ex. 3 Ryan Francis: The Francis article is a survey of a player who, while lacking height, was destined for greatness, before his life was cut short when he was murdered while visiting his mother last Mother's Day.

Ex. 4 Ty Lawson: Minimal information is included here, though to show a comparison, Lawson is pointed out as the TarHeels' fourth leading scorer; Lewis is fourth in points scored, fifth if you use averages, plus I've provided background information.

Ex. 5 Brandan Wright: He's been consistently in double digits and records a good deal of blocks. So does USC's Taj Gibson, who's averaging almost a double-double per game as a freshman (albeit at 21). Perhaps I'll submit an article on him.

Lewis, though a freshman, has made a huge impact on a program that has been, until this year, laughable. His stats are about even with Pruitt, who is clearly on here with a well-done piece. Plus there's the additional angle of him having overcome incredible circumstances, having withstood the horrors of Hurricane Katrina, to held lead a resurgance on a team.

I suppose I'll have to appeal--though to which one, as you suggested two options--or have to wait, which seems counterintuitive.

Regards,

Ashleyatusc 23:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

You may be correct that Lewis is sufficiently notable despite not being a pro yet. I don't follow basketball enough to be able to disprove you. My decision against creating the article is not binding and does not need to be appealed. As a registered user, you can create the article right now and I won't touch it. The suggestion to ask at other places was meant to help you get the opinion from someone with a better understanding of the notability policy as applied to athletes. This is because if Lewis is not notable, it is good to hear it before creating the article rather than after if someone nominates it for deletion. Happy editing. —Dgies^t c 23:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Chairboy RFC

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Chairboy is currently up for deletion over a dispute as to whether two or three editors have certified the concerns as valid. You comments there indicate agreement with the concerns. You may wish to "sign" at the place provided under User:Shaundakulbara's comments. Thanks. House of Scandal 11:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree only in the most peripheral way with one of those complaints. This RfC seems vindictive and should be rejected. —Dgies^t c 17:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Revert editing

I'm a 3 day old Newbie. How did you revert 3 vandal edits on Saddam Hussein simultaneously? Thanks. RadiantRay 18:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You can open the history and see the list of versions. Then click on the last good version to view it. Then click edit. It will show a warning that you are editing an old version. That's OK. Then save tat version with an edit summary which says you are reverting, like "revert", "rv vandalism", "rvv", etc. —Dgies^t c 19:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

ip vandal

I reblocked for a week. For some reason I had associated him with a school vandal, who I only want to give 24 hours for, but it shows no indication of being one, so I changed it to a week. ⇒ SWATJester ^{On Belay!} 20:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Timeline

Perhpas resolved request should be archived immediatley - and we can put a note on the requestor's talk page that it has been created and you can ask questions on templates talk page (hey ... that note could be a template!) - I mean users who are not the requestor but were interested could just look up at the "recently archived templates" section. I'm pretty sure you said a month for unresolved- and that sounds pretty reasonable - but definitley no more than that.Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 20:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I don't see the harm in leaving resolved requests up for a little while unless the page becomes popular enough that we get scores of them per week. Leaving them up is convenient for the requestor and will save us from "What happened to my request?" messages. —Dgies^t c 20:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey you seem to know a lore more than I do about templates - so would you mind helping me out. I have this one called Template:EasyLinkT - but I'm having some difficulties with the only conditional I have. I'd really appreciate any help you can give.Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 21:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You are trying to recreate a template which already exists: {{tl}} does exactly what you want. I suggest you put {{db-author}} on your copy. —Dgies^t c 21:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: For links to userspace templates, you want {{tlu}}. —Dgies^t c 21:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh ok, in that case could you just tell me what I had done wrong, I will put up the speedy right after.Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 21:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You are not using #if correctly. Your construct #if: {{{2|y}}}|Template: says "Take variable 2, or if missing, the value "y". If this evaluates to true, insert the text "Template:". Since #if evaluates to true for any non-empty text, "n" is true. Please see the help page for parser functions at meta:ParserFunctions#if. —Dgies^t c 21:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ahh I gotcha - k i'll put the tag upDaniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 22:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

K I put the tag up - thank you very much - although it seems like there is a way to do that (if the second parameter is two) - I mean I guess I could've swapped #ifexist: tags in there - but hey. Oh and sorry about the whole there's another template thing - I'm having a bad day.Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U

No problem. Read up on parser functions more. It's entirely possible to do what you were trying, but there are existing templates for your idea. —Dgies^t c 22:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow, so I just had another idea for archiving RTs. Maybe this would make things too complicated - but the goal is to have a easy start page. Ok, so you know how currently users will go to the page and portentially be kidna overwhellmed at all of the text - I'm thinking that maybe we should auto-archive everything by using Werdnabot (where you can say archive after 3,4,5 ... days) and put them into a page called "to be categorized" or something. This way we can have a system that tells people exactly what should/shouldn't be archived (anything that hadn't been archived by Werdnabot stays) and it makes it less daunting- what do you think?Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 20:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok for some reason I'm having a strange issue on my watchlist - could you respond on my talk page - sorry for the inconvienience ...Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 21:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

True but at the same time it could be a prevention measure (in regards to some kind of surge)Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 22:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I know I'm probably killing you with all these suggestions - but another thought entered my mind. The archive pages themselves will eventually grow a huge amount- should we perhaps archive them by year somehow? - because eventually scrolling down to the end of the page will be crazyDaniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/ 03:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely someday. If we get very heavy volume we could move to a much more automated system like they use at WP:AFC, but right now I don't think its worth the extra complexity. —Dgies^t c 04:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Feel Alive

May i ask why you reversed my changes to the article in the title? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.105.102.131 (talk) 04:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

I was quickly going through new edits looking for bad ones, and yours caught my eye because it was a review not by a major music reviewer and had a malformed citation format. In retrospect, I probably should have performed cleanup, not reverting. Sorry. —Dgies^t c 04:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

np.. i added it again. i dunno how to add a citation correctly tho, so if u want u can add it, i included the link where i got the info.

Question about #ifeq

Hey there. I'm working on a conditional template for the first time (mostly copy/pasting together other peoples work as I learn). I'm trying to insert an #ifeq condition into a table to define the cell colour, and somewhere it seems to be blowing up. If I manually put either of the colours in there, everything seems to work, but when I make it a condition it blows up. You can see my work at User:Maelwys\afc top for the template, and User:Maelwys\afc test for a page using it both ways (with and without the proper variable, so see the two results). If you could take a few minutes to look at it, I'd really appreciate it. I'm probably just making a simple mistake, but can't find enough documentation on the #ifeq condition or how it interacts with other formatting to figure it out myself. Thanks for any help/advice you can offer! --Maelwys 15:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see your template and your test case, but I don't see the problem. Your template is producing either a grey or green AfC cell depending on if varaible 1 equals "accept". Isn't that what you want? —Dgies^t c 17:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the part that shows initially (while compressed) is also supposed to be either green or red, instead of blue. If I replace the first #ifeq statement with either of the possible results of it, I see it in either green or red. But when the ifeq is there, it's apparantly reading neither result because it shows up in blue instead. So I'm assuming that the first statment is parsed incorrectly or something? --Maelwys 19:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. You had an extraneous ;" attatched to the #ifeq block that was messing up the styling. Is everything satisfactory now? —Dgies^t c 20:46, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks for your help! --Maelwys 20:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Religion texts

Hey should I remove jewish muslim christian texts etc from religious texts since they are subcategories of abrahamic texts

see Category:Abrahamic texts and Category:Religious texts

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Java7837 (talk • contribs)

In general, no. If something is placed in Category:Christian texts, it is automatically considered to be in a subcategory of Category:Abrahamic texts and Category:Religious texts. This is a good thing. What you don't want is for an article to have something like

[[Category:Abrahamic texts]]
[[Category:Religious texts]]
[[Category:Christian texts]]

at the bottom because then it is being placed bothin top-level category, and a subcategory, which doesn't make sense. There should be only one listing, for the most specific subcategory. See WP:CAT for guidelines. —Dgies^t c 23:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

that is not what i was asking the rastafarian jewish christian and islamic texts categories are listed under both abrahamic texts and religious texts should i remove the category religious texts from them is what i was asking

Oh well that's a very similar issue. For example: Category:Christian texts is a category, which has articles as members. Category:Christian texts itself is a member (and therefore a subcategory) of Category:Abrahamic texts. Category:Abrahamic texts is a member and subcategory of Category:Religious texts. It's not duplicate categories you are seeing, its just how subcategories are supposed to work. It doesn't look like you should change anything. —Dgies^t c 23:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Addendum: Nevermind, I see what you mean. No, it should not be necessary for Category:Christian texts to list itself in both Category:Abrahamic texts and Category:Religious texts, it should be just Category:Abrahamic texts since Category:Abrahamic texts is a subcategory of Category:Religious texts. —Dgies^t c 23:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Sonic and the Secret Rings

Reverting my edits was completely unneccessary as the only things I was in the process of editing were the references so they don't look like garbage. - 137.186.150.111 05:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I caused you trouble, but I can't predict the future and had no indication this is a work in progress. All I had to go on was seeing them disappear with no edit summary to explain it. Please use an edit summary and use the "Show preview" button to avoid these misunderstandings. —Dgies^t c 05:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Right, sorry. Regarding the "valid content", I believe I only removed the references in the Release Dates as it was redundant with the information in the opening paragraph.

Meh. I suppose if I'm going to redo all the references I might as well log in. - 137.186.150.111 05:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well that's one way to look less like a vandal, but edit summaries are A Good Thing. —Dgies^t c 05:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

ru:Калифорнийская Золотая Лихорадка

Hi! And it was the machine translation? By the way, be registered at us, in Russian Wiki!:)--Afinogenoff 08:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

It might be, I don't know. I can almost understand the Cyrillic alphabet but otherwise speak no Russian. —Dgies^t c 08:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

хе=хе :-) As in any way registered user to be better, than anonimys.--Afinogenoff 08:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Please join the Talk:R68 (New York City Subway car) discussion.

I've posted a prompt for consensus editing and cooperation on the talk page, please join and try to work towards a solution. ThuranX 03:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind your participation on the article's talk. My point is that all you were saying was what had been said all along, esp. the 'if you add it and it's uncited ,then anyone can remove it'. That's exactly what this edit war is about, adding and removing. saying someone can remove it doesn't add much. I'm trying to find ways to move beyond that, so the problem stops. I certainly welcome any help in building a consensus about what hte page's contents should be, and how to get there, but advocacy of the reversions isn't going to get us there. Please keep watching the page. Once we get some changes made to it by the regular editors, it may be that you see new ways to add to the article, or can provide some critical review of the solutions and their implementation. Sorry if I seemed overly hostile, but it just bugged me that the first major response was 'nothing to see here, move along, they've got it right to remove it', because that's exactly what the AN/I request was about moving beyond, not about reinforcing it. Hope you can continue to help. ThuranX 21:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

how did you do that?

how the heck did you move THAT fast to add the other socks befoer I could? ThuranX 04:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I have a black belt in vandal whacking. That, and I had their talk pages watchlisted. —Dgies^t c 05:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Poland Nav Box

We like to keep every Nav Box the same color and style. The color should be lightsteelblue and their should be a flag to the right of the inside of the box. It's just standard procedure.--Golich17 17:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Needing a new system for archived requested tempaltes

So I know we've kind of discussed this before, but I was scrolling through the archived templates in order to get the link for the one I just archived - and it's starting to get pretty rediculous. I think that we should create a system simmilar to the one that one of the missing citation backlog pages do. See the contents of this page. What we could do is have a organization system, that will allow clearing the page to be easiest for users, and then later peopel can go back and organize them. For example (The request for existing tempaltes needs to be renamed - that gets confusing, because some could think it means a request to update an existing template- I take it as a request that was since the template is existing - what I have now is a bad alternative, but it's a start):

All Old Request
Templates created or updated (Unorganized)			Template Denied because of Current Existance (Unorganized)			Request Closed without Template
A	B	...	A	B	...	A	B	...

What do you think? I mean frankly, if we don't do something soon it's going to be hell trying to save the archive - I just think we should think long term here.Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 22:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

One problem I see is that a lot of requests don't really have a good title so sorting them by title (as opposed to chronological) is sort of meaningless. How would you place a request titled "Display spelling based on browser" which resulted in no template being modified, created, or suggested? If you feel the need for more organization, how about something a bit more like WP:AFC? —Dgies^t c 22:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh you mean by date? That could work - although obviously ours wouldn't be quite as frequent - perhaps archived by month/week as opposed to day? OMG IDEA! in the subsections (as in "Templates created or updated") - we could use Werdna's bot that archives every x number of days! I'm willing to attempt to set all that up overnight if you want me to.Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 22:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. If you pick werdnabot I suggest only monthly archiving. —Dgies^t c 22:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

So something like this?

All Request
All Old Request (Using Werdna bot)
Templates created or updated (Unorganized)				Template Denied because of Current Existance (Unorganized)				Request Closed without Template (Unorganized
2007		2008		2007		2008		2007		2008
Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)	Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)	Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)	Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)	Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)	Month 1(Using Werdna bot)	Month ...(Using Werdna bot)

Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 22:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

If that looks ok to you I will start tonight (I have to do a few things outside WP first - but it will def. be up by tommorow)Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 22:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Aside from the color scheme it looks good. Can you swap it for the blues and greys seen on most of Wikipedia? —Dgies^t c 22:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

What color scheme? the table was just to show you what I was thinking...Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 04:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

OMG I FINISHED

holy crap, sorry for the caps but I had no idea that the above would take me so long - the archives were so out of order!!!!!! Ok fine, it only took me 2 hours, but still ... it felt like a longer time...Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with this?)} 06:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Spiffy; thanks. The bot should make maintenance simpler from here on out. —Dgies^t c 06:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		So it took me a while to realize it, but going over all of the requested templates yesterday, I realized just how much you've really helped people out so many times, I mean it's crazy - that's really the only word for it. Thusly, I truly believe that you deserve this Barnstar, it's people like you that really keep projects like that going. Daniel()Folsom |\T/|\C/|\U/|(Can you help me with my signature?) 00:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)