User talk:Ohconfucius/archive19

DEFENDER OF HONG KONG

1:52 AM, Thursday November 7, 2024

This user is a native of Hong Kong.

This user is a citizen of the United Kingdom.

This user lives in France.

This user has been on Wikipedia for 18 years, 10 months and 7 days.

... Overlinking Make wikilinks only where they are relevant and helpful in the context. Links can be distracting and may slow the reader down. Redundant links (like "the tallest people on Earth") clutter the page. High-value links will stand out more clearly in the absence of low-value links. Read more ... Add this to your user page by typing in {{Styletips}}

The Penguin Cabal

User:Ohconfucius/Globes

Talk page archives and miscellaneous Exchanges specific to my Engvar script are also archived at User talk:Ohconfucius/EngvarB.

Here you go

User:Ohconfucius/Amina Mariam Bokhary. Looking at it again, I think the main thing should be moving from tabloid to analytical sourcing. If such sources exist, I have no idea about that. Guy (Help!) 09:15, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:27, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Irena Jarocka / Antonio Berardi

Thanks for doing the clean-ups - aren't you signing up for the May Drive? Acabashi (talk) 05:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, I'm on board. Catch you around! --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Francoise Hardy

For some reason your script replaced Corsica with $2. Thought you would like to know. JMcC (talk) 22:39, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

• Much appreciated. Will go and sort the problem out. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Alice Ward

Hi. I appreciate your advice. I didn't realize that I had come off as hostile, but like everybody I can lose my cool. I don't think I have anything to add to the Ward page, so I don't plan on editing there, although you never know what might come up. I'll just wait and see how the closing admin rules. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 03:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

• I wouldn't have used the word 'hostile', but I think maybe you were just a little bit aggressive in getting your point across. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe. I guess getting the keyboard for me is like what getting behind the wheel of a car for others, you're in a different mode (or is it modality?). Thanks again for the advice. I do try not to bite the newbies, really I do. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 18:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC).

Anglophone

An English-speaking person (Occasional lapses grate a little to anglophones) ; or relating to a place where English is spoken. (Switzerland is not an anglophone country). - OED.

This, of course, includes Desmond Tutu and S. I. Hayakawa. If you knew no better, an apology will be welcome. If you did know better, this was a spurious claim of personal attack. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Mr Anderson, I independently saw your comment and recoiled at an apparent racist tinge. An apology is in order now that it has been pointed out, even if good faith is assumed and you had no racist intention. Tony (talk) 04:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Please be more specific when you believe that abusive conduct has happened. You appear to have not clarified to PMAnderson the nature of the perceived racism until you went to ANI. You need to be specific about what the problem was so that others can review and the accused party can properly defend themselves. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:25, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

No worries

I came across the page while wandering around - I very often don't read userpages, but your essay is compelling, and describes a serious issue, that I knew very little about. The misprint caught my eye, because I had to reread the context a couple of times, trying to fit in the "which" (what I thought it was). Trust me, the page is far from being a "mess" - if I had to describe an issue that annoying (as I sometimes do), I would often come up with the strangest verbiage. It's rare to see someone who is both angered and eloquent on wikipedia, and your essay is, as I said, compelling. Regards, Dahn (talk) 12:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

G12 taggings

Please be aware, if you are not already, that articles should not be tagged for G12 if there are non-infringing versions in the history - "Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained." (from the G12 criteria). As such I have removed the tag from Nayah. The page creator had already reverted to a non-infringing version. Dpmuk (talk) 13:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

• Noted, thanks. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 13:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Laura Bryna

I have to question just how thoroughly you searched for sources on Laura Bryna. I re-created the article with several sources from reliable publications such as Country Standard Time and Country Weekly. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

re Violette (singer)

No you make a good point. She's marginally notable at best, I don't have any other info on her, and AfD'ing would be appropriate. I had had hopes for her making a bigger splash (not that that is a very good reason for creating an article, sorry).

By the way, I notice that you took the time to actually write a handwritten note to me instead pasting a template or not communicating at all. <sarcasm>Isn't there some rule against that?</sarcasm>. Seriously, thank you for taking the time to write me a note, it is appreciated here. Herostratus (talk) 01:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

• "Isn't there some rule against that?" LOL. a surprising number of people complain about being templated... --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Amina Bokhary

The current shape of this article-to-be looks good. If you don't mind I'll move the article to mainspace later today and possibly submit a DYK on it. --Deryck C. 03:30, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, please be my guest. Thanks for your help. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 12:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

FLG vs VOA

I noticed you have removed the ntdtv.com reference, however, I managed to locate the VOA reference, hope that it is OK now. Arilang ^talk 14:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

• It was an item on television news in HK, so I guess it's OK. VOA is almost as partisan as NTDTV, but I just didn't want any Falun Gong 'pollution' of the article. I'm prepared to let this run despite believing it is not notable in the WP sense – it just seems like WP:NOTNEWS to me. Don't be surprised to see it taken to AfD. If nothing further comes of it, we should not rule out merging it into Ai Weiwei --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Though the notability may be a problem right now, my guess is that these kind of protests would become more frequent as long as Ai remains being lock up, but then, it might just as easily die down, who knows? Plus, if the PLA decide to take up legal actions, the heat would be turned up. Arilang ^talk 14:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
    • Agreed. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad DMY dates to MDY ?

Dear Ohconfucius,

I saw you changed all the dates of the article from day-month-year to month-day-year. Could you point out to me which part of MOSNUM supports this edit?

From what I read on MOSNUM:

• If an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the whole article should conform to it, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic.
• The date format chosen by the first major contributor in the early stages of an article should continue to be used, unless there is reason to change it based on strong national ties to the topic. Where an article has shown no clear sign of which format is used, the first person to insert a date is equivalent to "the first major contributor".

If this article may be considered strongly related to any nation, it would be of Pakistan, surely not the US or Canada (which are the only two countries in the world using this date format).

I strongly encourage you to take the time to undo your edit, which has to be done manually. In fact, I tried to revert it but several edits happened since your. As you said it used a script, I'm positive you can modify that script to change the dates back to the original format.

Thank you in advance for your understanding and cooperation.

Xionbox^₪ 20:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I've made the edit for you, but reverted myself because I take no position on which format should be used. I just wanted to make it easier for you to get your edit if you want it. All you have to do is revert my second edit. -Rrius (talk) 22:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry, my bad. I now notice that I had put them all to dmy a few days before. That edit was done late in the day. Fatigue must have set in. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 23:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you to the both you for settling this very quickly. Fatigue must have set in, talk to me about it! It happens to me all the time, so I fully understand!

Sincerely,

Xionbox^₪ 06:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Amina Bokhary controversy

Hi, just wondering what you think about adding a BLP connected template to the talkpage as the content is all about living people, thought? Off2riorob (talk) 10:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

• Rob, not sure exactly what you mean, but I would have no objection in principle. Can I leave it with you? Also, thanks for your help with the technical aspects concerning this article. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 11:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I will add something, really I just want a - take care bla bla living people template but I am unsur ehow to split them I wiill ask at the help desk and I so that would automatically noindex the talkpage also because some controversial stuff may get posted there. No worries I will see what to do I just wanted to make sure you didn't object. Thanks for the thanks but you are the one that did all the work to make the content compliant with policy - well done, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 11:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK: Amina Bokhary controversy

Question for an article you wrote at DYK, Amina Bokhary controversy, waiting for you there. Cheers Khazar (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Cheers -- Khazar (talk) 17:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Delinking World War II

Hi Ohcon, can you not delink this? I personally know people who do not know the difference between the World Wars or when WWII was (I had one person guess it started in 1900...), and I can't imagine that kind of non-knowledge is limited to those couple of my friends. :-) Thanks, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• ok. I do often restate it after running the script, but agree it may be better if not systematically unlinked. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:31, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Bug in User:Ohconfucius/MOSNUM dates.js

Hi! I have undone a scripted edit to Paul Simonon because it introduced a "cite error". The article uses "ref" and "reference" in such a strange way that the script got confused. You might like to have a look at it. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• First time i've seen that here too. I don't know if there's a fix. Maybe I'll just disable it for now. Thanks for notifying. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Please have a look Maoist China rhetoric and give some advice. Arilang ^talk 08:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• Initial thoughts are that I really don't see the point. For most of the phrases, I fail to see any notability. It is well-known that rhetoric and propaganda were used extensively during the Cultural Revolution, and while one or two examples of phrases used is fine for one or other article, having a collection like this seems to me to be rather indiscriminate. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 11:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

After comparing Cultural Revolution and 文化大革命, my feeling is that it will take many more editors many years to build up the English CR. Maoist China rhetoric is just one small step towards this goal, after all, to understand CR, one needs to understand the Maoist terminology. Arilang ^talk 11:38, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The King's School, Macclesfield

I see you changed "Notable Alumni" to "Alumni" here. I've noted that with school articles both terms seem to be common, some even use "Famous" (King Edward VI Grammar School, Louth), which is definitely over-egging it, unless there are some within an alumni list who are of major historic significance and need a separate "Famous" listing. I've usually thought that adding the Notable bit deters frivolous non-notable alumnus additions - anybody studying is part of the "Alumni". Schools guidelines do seem to support listing under "Notable". Acabashi (talk) 13:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• Admittedly I'm not familiar with school guidelines. One of the fundamental precepts of inclusion in WP is that the information must be notable. In that vein, I had always assumed that any alumnus listed is by definition notable, and use of 'notable' in the heading is redundant. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 13:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You are of course right. It does seem that "Notable Alumni" is, through common usage, the more prevalent and accepted, and is not particularly contentious. Either works I suppose, but I like the Notable as it could deter gratuitous edits by some who don't understand Wikipedia precepts and who might believe, therefore, that anybody can be added under "Alumni", particularly kids who include themselves or their mates - always a bit of a headache during school holidays. Not a big issue. Acabashi (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• What you said is true: we already see instances of kids adding their names or those of their mates to lists, I'm not sure putting 'notable' in the heading is going to have any deterrent effect, but I guess it's better to remove the temptation. I need to resist the temptation to remove 'notable', because – as I said before – it seems so obvious. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 15:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

L2 in Novi Ligure murder

Hello, Ohconfucius! Thank you for checking and approving my copy edit. I saw you added "needed L2" to the article Novi Ligure murder. Of course I am sure there is a lot of learning I need, but some tips could be useful; so please could you explain what is the main problem? Best wishes. --Broletto (talk) 15:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm sorry for my abbreviation. The text you ended up with was one amorphous chunk without headings. What I did in that edit was to create a new section for the details. As you will see from the diff, I separated it from the Lede by adding a level 2 heading ('==The incident=='). --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 16:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Never mind the abbreviation! I saw the change but I thought there could be more errors, so thank you for explaining.--Broletto (talk) 08:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Date Formats

You changed the date formats on the Electric Palace article quoting MOSNUM as your authority, yet it clearly states:

"Edit warring over optional styles (such as 14 February and February 14) is unacceptable. If an article has been stable in a given style, it should not be converted without a style-independent reason. Where in doubt, defer to the style used by the first major contributor"

So please leave it alone.

Davidlooser (talk) 21:23, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for quoting WP:RETAIN. That's just it... I demonstrated clearly there wasn't stability in any given style – that none could be discerned, therefore the above clause doesn't apply. What you are arguing for appears to be something called WP:OWN and WP:ILIKEIT. Now if you go and put it into a style that conforms with MOSNUM, whether that may be mmm dd, yyyy or dd mmm yyyy, then fine. If you insist on resisting, like you seem to be, then you are probably guilty of disruptive editing. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 23:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

• I basically agree with OhConfucius (but that's the lead section of MOS:NUM, not RETAIN). WP:DATESNO says 14 February or February 14 are OK, but not February 14th. So February 14th isn't what "optional styles" means. Art LaPella (talk) 00:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

No response

Hi there Ohconfucius, I was wondering if you can help me out with my questions that I left on my talk page. I know you are probably busy but was wondering if you can help. Thank you so much. Dinodong (talk) 01:46, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm sorry for not responding earlier, due to a combination of factors. I have now replied on your talk page. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE Drive

Could you just tell what you meant by WTF?--Ankit Maity ^{Talk • contribs} 07:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

• Apologies for the abbreviations. As far as I could tell, there was no "fruit" in your edit:

  The instance of 'in' you changed to 'at' was incorrect – you introduced a grammatical error.

  Your insertion of 'magazine' was unnecessary, as it is obvious from the opening sentence what it is; the word 'magazine' is not part of the name and just a little formatting would have left no doubt to was a publication.

  formatting of publication names is expected – instances of 'ComputerScope' should be in italics, as is required by WP:ITALICS.

  The article reads like it was written by an four-year-old. I would have expected a copyeditor to consolidate the prose to eliminate multiple instances of, for example, 'ComputerScope is/was'.

  In particular, this was written in broken or otherwise unflowing English, and I would have expected a rewrite: "ComputerScope is distributed as a request only, controlled circulation. Readers must qualify themselves before receipt. A subscription can be obtained if a reader request does not meet the criteria to receive free copies."

I would suggest that you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia:Basic copyediting, as well as our style guides to better understand what the finer points of copyediting are; another resource I found very useful is User:Tony1/How to improve your writing. Regards, --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

YYYY-MM-DD dates

Please stop mass-changing yyyy-mm-dd dates to your other date formats like you did at Aircraft industry of Russia. yyyy-mm-dd is a completely valid format and was used consistently in the article (as well as in many other articles which have become victim of your format-changing edits). Your actions are in violation of WP:MOS. If you continue, you will be reported to WP:AN. Nanobear (talk) 12:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh well, I see you've already received several warnings but still you did not stop. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Ohconfucios_mass-changing_date_formats. Nanobear (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

You are continuing to ignore concerns raised by other editors after 1) they have raised them with you, and 2) after they have advised that the issue of your edits has been raised elsewhere. STOP! --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 13:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you not read, or are you just stupid? STOP with your edits and discuss matters that have been raised. Your ignoring these concerns is not going to go well, particularly as it appears you are aware from previous incidents that your edits are controversial. I will be going and undoing all of your edits as you are ignoring what others are saying to you. --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 13:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Your script

This [1] edit seems to have changed a mdy date to dmy in the main text ("On 4 and 6 July 1879"), but a dmy to an mdy date in the references ("September 7, 2010"). It also left multiple yyyy-mm-dd dates unchanged. A mistake? Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

• thanks for pointing out the apparent schizoid behaviour. 'The 4 and 6 July' was manual. I have aligned the others to dmy now. The yyyy-mm-dd dates are from transcluded census templates, so need to be dealt with separately. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 17:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

You've got a response

At Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Correcting_links_to_redirected_article :)

The Helpful One 18:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive update

Guild of Copy Editors May 2011 backlog elimination drive update Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors May 2011 Backlog elimination drive! Here is your mid-drive newsletter. Participation GOCE May 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs So far, 54 people have signed up for the drive, and 33 are actively participating. If you signed up for the drive but have not participated yet, it's not too late! Try to copy edit at least a few articles. Remember, if you have rollover words from the last drive, you will lose them if you do not participate in this drive. If you have not signed up for the drive yet, you can sign up now. If you have questions about getting started, feel free to talk to us. Many thanks to those editors who have been helping out at the Requests page. We currently have 17 articles awaiting edit. Progress report We are making slow progress on achieving our target of reducing the overall backlog by 15%; in order to accomplish this goal we will need to complete about 400 more articles. However, we are making good progress on the 2009 backlog, as we have eliminated over half of the articles from 2009 that were present at the start of the drive. Let's concentrate our fire power on the remaining months from 2009; leaderboard awards will be handed out for 2009 articles this drive. Thank you for participating in the May 2011 drive. We hope it will be another success! Your drive coordinators – S Masters (talk), Diannaa (Talk), Tea with toast, Chaosdruid, and Torchiest

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Amina Bokhary controversy DYK

This DYK nomination was promoted to the queues but I have returned it to T:TDYK per legitimate concerns raised at WT:DYK. Sorry about that. Materialscientist (talk) 00:13, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Interesting delink of DVD in MOSNUM script

Just noticed a curious potential side effect in MOSNUM dates.js. It concerns this statement in Ohc_code_delink_dates() under the decades/years portion:

txt.value=txt.value.replace(/\[\[([MDCLXVI]{3,10})\]\]/g, '$1');

It seems to delink DVD, which is not a valid Roman number, although arguably a common enough term that may warrant delinking anyway. However, some combinations of Roman numeral letters could represent links for less common terms e.g. MIDI, which is actually a redirect that should be refactored. However, you might want to watch for occasional false positives here. The solution to this could get a bit complex, and maybe not a high priority fix, but the approach could be to add the regex chains to validate for the Roman numeral ordering e.g. MIDI is invalid since the first I (1) is followed by D (500) - I should only appear towards the end, or as part of IX (9).

Also, thanks for the recent input involving Bcharles on my talk pg. Dl2000 (talk) 00:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the feedback. I think I'll disable that rule, as Roman numerals seem to be hardly ever linked anyway to warrant creating ever more specific regex. I now watch your page as well as your datefix in case there are bug reports, and I suggest you equally watch mine. BTW, I have been making some changes to the dates script - many are mere tweaks, but some are bug fixes. I doubt any of my changes will stump you, as you seem to be a more advanced scripter than me, but please let me know if anything is unclear. Incidentally, I have written a common terms script which will unlink DVD, among others ;-). --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
• I have a false positive. I tweaked the regex last night, thinking I must have got it, but I still have the same error. I'm tearing my hair out – what's left of it. Can you help? --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 06:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Assuming the false positive was about situations like "January 4, 37–29 at" --> "4, 37–29 January", it seems to be done under the first rule under "//convert md,d,d, date ranges to d,d,dm (multiple, separated by commas)". The regex reformats "January 4, 6–8" --> "4, 6–8 January" OK, but it will also reformat scores which immediately follow dates.

You could tighten this part of the rule to avoid dates > 31 with a change like this:

• (existing) ((?:,?\s[0-3]?\d(?:th|st|nd|rd|)){0,6})
• (modified to limit to 30/31) ((?:,?\s([0-2]?\d|30|31)(?:th|st|nd|rd|)){0,6})

However, it is not a complete solution as it won't be able to tell whether the 6–8 is a date or a score in the example of "January 4, 6–8".

In such cases, it may be better to manually tweak the prose to properly separate scores away from dates, to avoid making the score look like its part of the date range e.g. "on January 4, 37–29 at Lansdowne Road," could be refactored to "on 4 January at Lansdowne Road (37–29)". I'll have to take a more detailed look at how the regex could work for this, but I've tended to just fix such occasional article anomalies manually.

Dl2000 (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks. Yes, that was the string causing the problem. I agree that the way the text was written is problematic/ambiguous, and was going to refactor it. However, my request to you was due to my frustration to find the error persisting after considerable tweaking, which included the modification you suggested above. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry, I now realise I am using my alternate script. No wonder the changes did not have any effect! --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

*cough*`

you need to expand your script: South African topics require {{South African English}}. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:41, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• The Engvar script, which spurred my setting up the {{Use British English}} template as a maintenance task, contains a list of spellings I believe to be common to English, Scottish, Irish, Australian, South African. I do not intend to build anything any more complex than a common set of spellings that use the template. Therefore, I do not believe we will ever need to use templates other than 'British', 'Canadian' and Oxford'. Notwithstanding that, {{South African English}} can stay on the talk page as a visible reminder. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm. And what then is the difference between British and Canadian? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 08:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• As you probably can guess, some Canadian spellings are closer to British, whilst others are closer to American. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

(ec) Nevermind -- saw your additional explanation in the template's documentation. I will re-instate it then where I had already reverted. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 09:00, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry for the misunderstanding. I should have put that on the template doc long time ago. Cheers, --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:01, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

copyright investigation

I don't mean to rush you, but since google books is entangled in a copyright legal battle and some books are having a tendency to dissapear, the case needs to be worked on sooner, before the googlebooks linked i posted are either deleted or evaporated. Unlike any of the other copyvio cases, in mine, you have straight access right to the source- its in danger of dissapearing if you don't act upon it soon.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 07:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

google library project faces copyright issues[

Google in $13m legal fight over scanned books

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Дунгане

Your edit on STS-51-L

Hi there,

Your edit on STS-51-L today broke the table in the Mission parameters section. I'm not going to revert it because you had other edits outside of that table and I don't want to revert them too. It would be appreciated it you could fix it. Thanks! -- Uhai (talk · contribs) 22:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Date script?

Hey, what happened to your script? When I edit a page now, I don't get the script links on the left side. I know there was some controversy about the script on AIN or some other noticeboard, which I contributed to, but I don't know what came of it (and can't find it now). Anyway, I wanted to change the date format on an article with the script but can't. Please tell me it still exists.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

• It could have something to do with those changes I made yesterday which I have now reversed for the time being. see if this brings back the script. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

In that case, import User:Ohconfucius/MOSNUM_dates_prime.js instead of MOSNUM dates.js. I'm using it this very minute, so I know it works. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Should I remove the other?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, they will interfere with one another. BTW, I note that you are still having problems with the mediawiki software. If this script doesn't work, then I'd blame the foundation. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The links have come back when using the prime script. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 15:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I've now replaced the contents of the original MOSNUM script with a working version. It's preferable that you use something which is not my testing ground, so could you go back to using User:Ohconfucius/MOSNUM dates.js? Thanks. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 23:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

MOSNUM script now at User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates.js --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Ohc, I updated the location of the script per above, but I'm again not getting the links on the left when I edit a page. Did I do something wrong?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

• :-( I've tried it on three accounts, and it's loading properly. I have the buttons on the sidebar, and the script is doing its thang. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 16:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's working now. After changing the location of the script, I refreshed twice before posting here. I have no idea why it started to work. Oh, well, nothing has been going well on Wikipedia for me lately.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads up. I occasionally have glitches, but I have still managed to do several hundred edits today. Among those, there have been a few improper page loads, and many slow script loads. The MediaWiki software has been buggy for two weeks now; it was wonderfully smooth just prior to that. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 17:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Major reorganisation of my subpages

I have just undertaken a wholescale reorganisation of the structure of pages in my userspace, and would apologise in advance to any disruption to scripts etc. If a script you are currently using has ceased to function, please go to the relevant subsection to find the new address and relink accordingly. I would urge/remind you to bookmark the scripts you use to follow their evolution. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Great Arkansas Barnstar

		The Great Arkansas Barnstar
		Thanks for your work cleaning up 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (United States) and related articles on the Arkansas National Guard. Thanks! Aleutian06 (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I am very appreciative of you efforts at correcting my date formats. I always wondered why there wasn't a bot for this!. Would you consider doing the same thing for 206th Field Artillery Regiment (United States). Happy Editing! Aleutian06 (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your work in recent days on Arkansas Guard related articles. I wonder if you could do a copy edit on this article also? 153rd Infantry Regiment (United States) Aleutian06 (talk) 02:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I've done a bit of work on the article as requested. Please could you just check the diffs to make sure I haven't changed the meaning of anything I ought not to have. You will notice that I have removed certain text, citing 'trivia'. You may want to put these back if they are in any way significant – just that I couldn't see any importance when I read through the article, but you may know something I do not. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 06:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate the "bit of work"! I added back one bit of trivia which included a reference to a letter in which a 153rd soldier is describing being in combat. I actuall have a little more information now on what became of the soldiers after they were used as replacements that I need to add to this article. Thanks again for all your help. Aleutian06 (talk) 12:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Dates in tables

Since you appear to be a "date" enthusiast, I wonder if you can help me with an issue with the dates in a table. I edit the Arkansas Militia in the Civil War. One of the tables has the date that various units were formed. This is a sortable table. It would be very help full if the date column could be sorted, but currently the dates are in the Day/Month/Year format. Interestingly, the main source for this table, "List of Militia Officers, 1827-1862" uses Year/Month/Day. I think the table would sort properly if this date was utilized throughout the table. I think Month/Day/Year is more appropriate for the text of this article, since that seems to be the common usage of the time period. Any thoughts? Aleutian06 (talk) 13:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• I've put in a sortable criterion for dates in that table that allows display in dmy. I hope that it now works as you expect it. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 14:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Outstanding! Thanks very much.Aleutian06 (talk) 14:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

U.S. Army in World War II book series

Please note the titles in this series have the periods (".") after "U" and "S". As a broader suggestion, editing the titles of works listed as sources in articles is probably not a good idea unless one is absolutely certain the title has been presented in error. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:16, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

• noted. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:20, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Image filenames

Please be more careful when you are editing dates. I've recently fixed at least half a dozen image links that were broken by you. --Zundark (talk) 12:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC) where? --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 12:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Parties in the European Council during 2005, History of the France national football team, FC Girondins de Bordeaux, European Council, Fukushima nuclear accident log, March 2011, and at least one other that I can't find at the moment. --Zundark (talk) 13:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

• • Thanks. will look into it. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 13:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK Comments on Badai Pasti Berlalu (x4) and Marga T

Hi, I have replied to your comments at the DYK nomination of Badai Pasti Berlalu (song, film, novel, and album) and Marga T. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:27, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi again

Recently I am into argument with user:ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ in a big way at Talk:Boxer Rebellion#Lead section, resulting in me firing up an ANI at him, see [2] my key argument is ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ's editing on Boxer Rebellion is mostly biased and non-neutral, in violation of WP:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight, so someone need to tell him to stop. Instead of engaging other editors to thrash out the neutrality issue, he turn around and attack me using same old accusations plucking from those previous ANI on me.

If you have some free time please have a look and maybe make some comments? Thanks. Arilang ^talk 13:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Please communicate in the appropriate forum
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Arilang1234 attempts to link Chinese high schools text books, black panthers, marxists, and vietnam war protestors to the Boxers "The lead section now reads like a straight copy from standard Chinese high school text book, all these anti-imperialism rant" marxists, black panthers, vietnam era war protestors are apparently behind the insertion of "anti imperialism" into the article.... This is a direct ripoff of when he claimed that "chinese communist propaganda" was inserted into the article-[3] [4] I did not use a single chinese communist, marxist, or "Black panther" source in the article. All of the authors of the works cited in the boxer article had degrees from western universities.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 18:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Canvasssing and false accusations by Arilang1234 Arilang1234 has been doing Wikipedia:Canvassing, deliberately asking editors whom I have had disputes with- User:John Smith's and User:Smallchief I request neutral editors like you engage in the discussion as well, to offset his canvassing. (you were not involved with boxer rebellion article)ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Its at this ANI threadΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC) I counted at least 2 false accusations by Arilang1234 against me which you can easily take a look at (meaning its not muddled up or confused with random edits). #1 Arilang1234 claims I did not respond to Smallchief- I did #2 Arilang1234 claims I did not respond to John smith's concern about neutrality- I did This is not just an ordinary mistake, or slip up by Arilang1234. My response to Smallchief and John Smith's was right there in plain english- and Arilang1234 deliberately went into the edit history to select and post specific edits I made before I responded, to make sure users were unable to see that I did respond to their concerns later. If he had posted a direct link to the section as it is now, all the users would have been able to seen my responses.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC) we need third party neutrals at this ANI dispute you've dealt with both me and Arilang1234 before Arilang1234 having a go at his POV pushing on the boxer rebellion article, claiming the content in the article is from "chinese high school text book", when not a single chinese or communist source was used in the article. look at the section now- Talk:Boxer_Rebellion#Lead_section report I made on his edits- he tries to link the black panthers, marxists, and vietnam war to anti imperialism on the boxer rebellion= User:ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ/Report ANI marxists, black panthers and vietnam protestors have something to do with anti imperialism in the boxer rebellion according to arilang since benlisquare mentioned australia also includes anti imperialism in its textbooks, arilang1234 goes on to claim it must be because australia is a "socialist" country Now he thinks dropping off conspiracy theories about high school text books, australia, marxists, black panthers, and vietnam on the boxer rebellion article and filing an ANI report after he was criticized for doing so is acceptable Arilang1234 attempting wikilawyering and making threats when he was caught trolling After his trolling on the Boxer rebellion talk page, Arilang1234 proceeded to file this ANI report complaining about me after I criticized him for his attempt at linking marxists, black panthers, and vietnam war to the Boxer rebels...ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 00:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC) And he titled the ANI thread "racist", and proceeded to provide not one single piece of evidence that I said anything racist at all. One also has to wonder what the "cold war" he inserted into the title has to do with anything other than to grab attention.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 00:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Much as I understand that the dispute seems to have escalated to a personal level, I would appreciate it if you would not allow this to spill over onto my talk page. If/when I have time, I will go and look at the dispute and see what assistance I can offer. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Possible oversight in -slash-dates conversions

Just did a few tests tonight - noticed that when US-slash-dates is used on your script, 12/5/1982 remains intact and doesn't convert to a MoS-compliant date, although 12/05/1982 will. Seems OK for day >= 10 e.g. 12/13/1982 converts. UK-slash-dates may be more problematic, as it doesn't seems to convert either 4/1/1982 or 4/01/1982, although 04/1/1982 and 04/01/1982 seem to convert OK. You could make a copy of some test cases in User:Dl2000/testtemp7. Dl2000 (talk) 01:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• I might have been concerned at the risk of false positives, but I've now enabled conversion by my test script of those dates without leading zeros in either month or day. Note that some images are coded with slash dates, which may be converted by the script as it stands. However, as it's an additional/optional button, it should hopefully not be too much of an issue. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Changing date formats on US related articles

I noticed you were changing the date format on a lot of articles and thought I would stop by and discuss it. Although I do not have a preference myself I wanted to stop and note that even within the military either format of DD MMM YYYY or MMM DD, YYYY are acceptable depending on the type of correspondance being used and who does it. For example the Navy Corresponence manual states on page 2-11 that either format is acceptable and in certain cases one is preferred over the other. --Kumioko (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for the information. I was only aware that the older Milhist articles usually follow mdy format. Many of these articles have a mix of formats, and I had assumed, through my reading of MOSNUM, that by WIkipedia definition US Military uses dmy so I set about unifying the dates. SO far, nobody has raised any objection - indeed one Milhistorian awarded me a barnstar yesterday for my efforts. There are many more that haven't been done. Perhaps I shall move onto something else for a week or two and allow the comments if there are any to catch up. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 17:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't mean to disuade you from doing them and I also notice that many articles use a combination of formats I just wanted to mention it. I think the Army is more stingent on the use of one format over another but I am more familiar with US navy and Marine Corps usage than Army usage. --Kumioko (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand. I think in that case I will drive on with US Army articles. Or I will work on other categories for now. There's plenty of work to go around, but it makes life much simpler to be able to sail through any given category and not have to think/worry about which script button to activate. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 17:22, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I understand, I have spent the last few days (and a couple more to go) identifying the articles in WPUS (mostly the Biographies for now) that are missing Infoboxes. Once I am done I will start adding some of them (I'll probably start with the US military related ones since that will be a win for both projects and right now the MILHIST project is more active than US. My guess is that if people start seeing edits being made to articles on their watchlist they will probably do a couple too thereby improving the articles. Of course there is only so much I can do when adding an Infobox in a semi automated fashion but at least it will be there so someone else can fill in the rest. --Kumioko (talk) 17:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, an edit to a neglected or forgotten article certainly wakes me up to its existence on my watchlist, and occasionally causes me to make a flurry of edits! --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:19, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi

I am very surprised to see that no admin care to either comment or close the ANI, it looks like everyone just leave it as it is. What happen when argument flares up again at Boxer Rebellion? Arilang ^talk 11:09, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• Well, there is no obligation for anyone to comment or close ANI threads. Many are simply archived when the community loses interest, or when both parties have exhausted their arguments. I think it is quite clear that the community believes you have both behaved abominably, and that discussing the matter or taking sides in any way will just fan the flames that had engulfed both of you. My advice is that you should both assume a greater amount of good faith in each other in future, exercise better self-discipline going forwards. You should try giving yourself more time to think through both side's arguments rationally and with a cool head. Above all, you should avoid making any criticisms of a personal nature or comments which could be interpreted as personal attacks. I'm sorry for the 'lecture'. I also appreciate that it is easier to say than to carry out what I recommend. I hope you will continue to work hard on your editing as well as interpersonal skills, which will benefit your life and dealings outside Wikipedia. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 12:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind comment, I promise there would not be any more this sort of "abnormal" and unnecessary stuff from me. Arilang ^talk 12:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

New article

When you have time please have a look:List of 1900-1930 publications on Boxer Rebellion, please help out on WP issues. Arilang ^talk 01:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi again, since no admin care to make any further comment, and if any argument flare up again in future, please advice on what other steps can I take, like what is the next higher level I can go? Arilang ^talk 04:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, Ohconfucius, for your recent helpful edit to the new article I created, at Savage Love: Straight Answers from America's Most Popular Sex Columnist. Much appreciated. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

• Think nothing of it! --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Scripts

Hello, Ohconfucius. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.