User talk:Dgies

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)

Hey thanks. You're no slouch yourself. —Dgies^t c 03:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Vote

Why did you remove my vote? Hunted by A.K.G. 21:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I just restored it. A vote by an extremely new user in an RfA (or anything voting-like) makes it look like the user might not actually be a new user at all, but rather a sockpuppet. If you are not one I'm sorry for causing offense. Nevertheless, the instructions at WP:RFA do warn that votes by very new users may be given less weight. —Dgies^t c 21:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Still, it soesn't need said that I am new. Hunted by A.K.G. 21:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

A brand new user commenting in an RfA is fairly unusual activity for a regular user. Most people start out editing articles. When a brand new user joins a vote as their second edit ever, it looks pretty suspicious. I think it is fair to point out suspicious activity to others and let them decide. If you are not a sockpuppet, just realize that as a total newcomer to Wikipedia, your opinions in some policy-related matters may be given less weight because it is assumed you are not experienced in dealing with policy. —Dgies^t c 21:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I have a feeling about who this is, and I don't like it, but the fact that they voted for me makes me doubt my suspicions. Anyway, I have a strange feeling about this. 声援 -- The Hybrid 21:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Who do you think I am?Hunted by A.K.G. 21:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Note:I now have over 10 edits. Hunted by A.K.G. 22:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

A very real possibility, but Tree63 isn't exactly the kind of page this person would edit. It is probably someone else, but I still feel uneasy about this. 声援 -- The Hybrid 22:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Never heard of that puppeteer. Hmmm, but why would he vote for me? I find that very strange. Oh well, at least it’s sorted out. Thanks for letting me know, 声援 -- The Hybrid 22:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

what?

You called me a sockpuppet. WITW is that for? Hunted by A.K.G. 23:20, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I said you might be a sockpuppet because your editing pattern is very suspicious for a new user. Can you offer an explanation why you are editing these policy pages most new users have never heard of? —Dgies^t c 23:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: User was later blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Zbl. —Dgies^t c 06:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On February 28, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Drascombe, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks Dgies. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Re. Admin coaching

Hello Dgies and thank you for contacting me. Templates are not my area of expertise, but I can surely help you with vandalfight, page protection and deletion procedures. I'll review your contributions later and tell you what I think of your performance in these areas. :-) Regards, Húsönd 20:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I have also worked in RfD, MfD and TfD before if these are more familiar to you. —Dgies^t c 21:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

yes

it would be an honor & a Privilege to have this done, so yes sr I would like that if you dont mind!--Lolicon3043910 13:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

I realize you're only doing what you think is helpful, but I wonder if the "adoption" of User:Saikano might not do more harm than good. It looks to me like this editor lacks the language skills and maturity to be useful contributor, so it may be best if he moves on. He seems to think wikipedia is about chatting and making friends, not making an encyclopedia, so I'm concerned that this adoption will only reinforce his mistaken beliefs. Friday (talk) 15:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming they are fairly young and are currently using Wikipedia the same way they have used other forums in the past. If I can change that behavior, great. If not, there are plenty of ways to deal with problematic editors. —Dgies^t c 16:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope this means you'll be keeping an eye on him and deleting/reverting his unhelpful edits. Friday (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll do what I can without being too confrontational. —Dgies^t c 18:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just left him a message explaining why I blocked him. So far his response is nonsensical, which reinforces my belief that he lacks sufficient competence to edit. But, if you can explain things to him in a way he can understand, please do. Friday (talk) 19:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Their contribs to the article Saikano actually look sane (if inexperienced). Maybe a "time out" will be corrective. —Dgies^t c 19:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there have been a handful of good faith (but not necessarily helpful) edits to Saikano. The problem is the lack of sane responses and a willful disregard for other editors' concerns. Leebo⁸⁶ 19:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Backlog on TFD

The idea of the backlog notice on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion was to have someone take care of the debate. Most people are uncomfortable about a tag being on a page, which shouldn't be taken advantage of in mainspace really, but project space seems fine. I suppose I'll post something at WP:AN next time, or just be patient.... yawn. Happy editing, Gracenotes^T § 20:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see that you put the adminbacklog notice onto that day's log. Oh well, it's still in the category, I guess. (Then again, no reason why an admin should pay attention to this more than anything else.) Gracenotes^T § 20:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I realized it was best to target the notice as narrowly as possible, so I <noinclude>ed it to not tag the top level TfD page. There's just a single debate which is about 3 weeks old. —Dgies^t c 21:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 1 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hernando Arias de Saavedra, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 23:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)