Jump to content

User talk:Kaldari: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 250: Line 250:


You seem to be an editor in good standing and an administrator to boot. Then I can't understand vandalism to the article [[Atlanta californiensis]], where you write that this snail is 5 miles long ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atlanta_californiensis&oldid=446234805]). Or has your computer been used by someone else using your username ? I haven't given you the normal notification of an act of vandalism (intentional false information), because I can hardly believe that you would do this, but rather give you a friendly notification. I have now edited the article by adding some data. [[User:JoJan|JoJan]] ([[User talk:JoJan|talk]]) 13:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
You seem to be an editor in good standing and an administrator to boot. Then I can't understand vandalism to the article [[Atlanta californiensis]], where you write that this snail is 5 miles long ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atlanta_californiensis&oldid=446234805]). Or has your computer been used by someone else using your username ? I haven't given you the normal notification of an act of vandalism (intentional false information), because I can hardly believe that you would do this, but rather give you a friendly notification. I have now edited the article by adding some data. [[User:JoJan|JoJan]] ([[User talk:JoJan|talk]]) 13:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

== Donky Kong list organization ==

Hi- I just wanted to follow up with you regarding the discussion at [[Talk:List of Donkey Kong video games#List organization]]. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks. ([[User:Guyinblack25|Guyinblack25]] <sup>[[User talk:Guyinblack25|talk]]</sup> 15:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC))

Revision as of 15:40, 23 August 2011

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation

In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid concerns that this notice might violate WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page (or either page's respective talk page) since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:22, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilove "make your own"

It works now. Thank you! ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Made my own!

The Order of Wrigley
I hereby present you this award, for persistence in the face of all odds and evens. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multilingual WikiLove

Hi, is it possible to make a multilingual version of WikiLove for the Wikimedia Commons? I'm not very good with codes so I'm not sure how should I do it or how difficult it might be. I believe it could be really useful for the community and it will improve the Commons' atmosphere.   ■ MMXX  talk  10:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, WikiLove is still considered an "experiment". If it proves to be useful and effective on the English Wikipedia, it will be updated to support language localization and then deployed to the other wikis as well. The analytics team is planning on doing some in-depth number crunching on how WikiLove effects new editor retention within the next few months, so stay tuned. Kaldari (talk) 00:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply, I can't wait to see this gadget in Commons and I'm sure it will help to improve the atmosphere among users.   ■ MMXX  talk  08:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Phyllis Chesler

Thanks for cleaning this up, I removed the legal threat taking a deep breath at the thought of trying to wade through the wreckage to make some sense of this article. FrankFlanagan (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, please feel free to help clean it up further. It's unfortunate that every article dealing with Jews and Muslims on Wikipedia has to be the victim of unproductive edit warring and POV pushing. Kaldari (talk) 18:35, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rape Culture article

Thanks for explaining the further reading removal. I hadn't looked closely enough to realize it wasn't entirely needed for the article. (Of course, it could have a section on rape culture and we wouldn't know...) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, doesn't seem to have much on it; here's the GB link Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it doesn't even mention the phrase "rape culture" in the book. I imagine someone added it as a bit of POV-pushing against the concept of rape culture. As such, it could be used as a citation for criticism, but it doesn't make sense in the Further Reading section. Kaldari (talk) 03:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: barnstar

Awww, thanks! Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:01, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FP nomination of Les Demoiselles d'Avignon

Hi Kaldari. I just wanted to inform you that Les Demoiselles d'Avignon is up for Featured picture again. The nomination can be found here. I am informing you as you have previously participated in a Featured Picture review of this image, here. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for getting geonotices working again! Ijon (talk) 00:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Teamwork Barnstar

The Teamwork Barnstar
To Kaldari, Ipigott, and WereSpielChequers: Thank you for helping make Wadsworth Jarrell a Good Article! I really appreciate the keen eye and contributions you made to improve the article. Much #wikilove to you all and I hope to work with you on another GA soon! SarahStierch (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article promotion

Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Wadsworth Jarrell a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.

In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

How do I get one of these ;-) SarahStierch (talk) 15:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you just bring an article up to Good Article standard, of course! Looks like Corwin Clairmont might not be too far... Unless you meant the actual Senoufo mask. Those are probably a little harder to come by. – Quadell (talk) 15:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drama Desk templates

I was trying to make the colors of different awards be different but the same within the award. When you look at the templates at A Chorus Line or Judi Dench, we want all the colors to be helpful. I'll take a closer look at the color shading and see what I can do.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the following colors? Let me know if you have a preference. #40E0D0; #8FBC8F; #778899; --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you want something like #F5F5F5;?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
#d7f1d7; is a good suggestion. I will swap them all in tonight.

User talk:Nmatavka/Images under surveillance

Should User talk:Nmatavka/Images under surveillance also be deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nmatavka/Images under surveillance? Cunard (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, forgot about that. Kaldari (talk) 17:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter

The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Ryan,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Mitchell Map-06full2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 24, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-07-24. howcheng {chat} 17:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Abortion". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by August 8, 2011.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 19:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing question

I've recently spoken with an author of one of the books used as a source for the femininity article, and she seems interested in possibly posting some comments or doing a QA with us on the talk page. Would this be considered canvassing? --Aronoel (talk) 03:15, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inviting an expert to comment on the article wouldn't be considered canvassing unless you are specifically trying to sway a debate in your favor. Kaldari (talk) 17:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I don't know what her position would be on our debates. But I think she's probably too busy anyway. Also, could you comment on the self-abasement issue again? I think it's a big problem start removing some behaviors from that article that are listed in sources. --Aronoel (talk) 15:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Abortion, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK [•] 14:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

A cup of coffee for you!

جمال الحجيلان (talk) 19:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

that was a test sir :)

Per Carolmooredc

I received your message. I am sorry that you did not read the talk pages of the Death of Caylee Anthony to see all of her insults. She has been blocked for three months by one editor (please see her talk page) and recently warned by another (also on her talk page) on two different articles. Now on this article, Death of Caylee Anthony, she insults, reverts and disrupts articles and does not obey consensus. She reprimands others as if she were an administrator. She puts the 3RR banner up with a basic misunderstanding of what it means. She has done this with two other articles that I know of. I have never been blocked or threatened to be blocked. I have never been before warned. I have spent several hours trying to "help" CarolMooreDC as the talk page and archives reflect if you would but look. Today, I have lost patience and now will not address her futher. Recently I had to delete a paragraph of hers which mistated testimony given in the Casey Anthony trial. This paragraph as she wrote it basically accused a living person of covering up a murder. The edits she made were factually incorrect and giant BLP issues. I discussed them with her and (as a former paralegal for a Bronx DA) rehabitated the pargraph for her but she took offense. See Krystal Holloway section on Article talk page. I also tried to help her with the legal terminology she was misusing. I hope that you will read the talk pages which show many editors problems with this very bizarre editor before passing judgment. Thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is very good advice and I intend to take it. Thank you for listening to my side as well. Mugginsx (talk) 10:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FYI to you concerning My Response to Administrator User talk:Malik Shabazz (also on his page) in order to inform you of User talk:Carolmooredc's most recent accusations to yet another Administrator:
Since User talk:Kaldari's suggestion I have not responded to the above-named editor at any time. Since User talk:Carolmooredc latest accusations (at least the ones I can understand) are blatently false I am also putting this response here to you as well as another Administrator who is familiar with the this editor. As I previously stated, I made only one (distant and individual) revert to three distinct and various sections on various days, that have anything at all to do with User talk:Carolmooredc. They are all and only on Death of Casey Anthony article. I repeat they were different areas of the article at different times over various days.
One was the Krystal Holloway paragraph. User talk:Carolmooredc attempted to put into Death of Casey Anthony article. It was incomplete and incorrect and a clear BLP violation as written, it accused George Anthony, a living person, of covering up the murder of his granddaughter. The testimony in trial tapes and the talk page comments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Death_of_Caylee_Anthony/Archive_6 entitled: Krystal Hollyway, clearly show the testimony went the other way and Ms. Holloway on cross, when shown her sworn statement to police finally told the truth. That could not be ignored. User talk:Carolmooredc argued against revert. I explained to her in detail, using the benefit of my criminal law experience, that this was a clear BLP violation and factually inaccurate. I tried to rehabititate the paragraph to make it factually correct but since she continued to argue about it, I had to finally take it out completely in accordance with wikipedia BLP policy. User talk:Carolmooredc still to this day maintains that if the source is found in a reference, (I am pharaphrasing) it must be true. The newest reference below is still not accurate because the judge found Ms. Holloway's statements to be prior inconsistent statements and to ignore both of them as untrue. That is the trial law in every criminal case. Also BLP states any contentious materials must be removed immediately. Newspaper references do not always tell the truth or the full story as I tried to explain to User talk:Carolmooredc, newspapers have legal protections and guidelines that common citizens, and we at Wiki do not. I referred her to Wiki/legal and to BLP again and again.
The second revert was many days later when User talk:Carolmooredc put several dates and delineated them according to which side gave a closing argument, the different kinds of closing arguments and what date they occured on, etc. etc. I maintained that all except beginning and end dates were unnecessary. Upon research and just common sense, that no editor has and put such detailed information in any other article about closing arguments in a trial. I researched many Wikipedia murder and infanticide trial articles and most do not even mention closing arguments); including, but not limited to: David Westerfield murder trial, OJ Simpson murder trial, Susan Smith murder trial and Andrea Yates murder trial. Her edit was overly-detailed and unnecessary and other editors agreed.
I also re-inserted my references in the Verdict Sentence section of the Death of Caylee Anthony article to make it once again factually correct. To my knowledge, and without looking up every edit I do not believe that I have not touched any other of User talk:Carolmooredc's work. In fact, if you look here on the article Talkpage you will see where I praised her for an edit (see on Talkpage under section titled: Chronological timeline/Source for every day of the trial - second paragraph.
As to User talk:Carolmooredc's claim I and other broke the 3RR rule on this article my work speaks for itself. If other editors reverted her edits, they can speak for themselves but I maintain there was NO 3RR violation here by any other editor. Further User talk:Carolmooredchas made that accusation on other articles she worked on and in fact, someone finally supplied a template http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Carolmooredc/Archive_VI&diff=441900074&oldid=439781585 to try to help her understand the meaning of 3RR and delineate the specific accused reverts, though she has apparently since taken it off talk page. She does not consider advice by anyone, editor or editor/administrator, as helpful, but rather, it would seem, a challenge or an insult. As of this moment User talk:Carolmooredc has taken even that editor's kindly suggestion off of her Talkpage. It seems there is unpleasantness and discourse on many, if not all, of the articles User talk:Carolmooredc has involved herself in. I am sorry to trouble you with this. I know administrators are very busy, but it is all too bizarre for me since I have complied to the letter and the spirit of your instructions and I will not have it said or made to seem otherwise. I have a good reputation on Wikipedia and would like to keep it that way. In closing, since your notice, I have not and will not respond to this editor anytime in the future unless directed to by you or another administrator. Thankyou.

I have repeated her response below. Mugginsx (talk) 08:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, we still have to discuss the article. For example I finally found a source that makes clear what happened with the Krystal Holloway testimony: After Holloway left the courtroom, Perry instructed the jury that it should only use the witness' testimony regarding George's statements to her to discern whether or not they believe George's previous testimony, and not as a basis for their verdict for Casey. I'll verify with multiple other sources, but I hardly think mentioning whatever happened in such important testimony that backs up the "accident that snowballed out of control" contention of the winning defense team is irrelevant to the article; nor is it a BLP violation if it merely repeats what many other WP:RS have said. Enough said here. We can discuss at whatever point it becomes relevant on the talk page. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chelicerata

Hi, Kaldari. Sorry, but I reverted your change to the taxobox at Chelicerata as I think the change removed how to navigate from Animalia to Chelicerata. I'm sure you thought there were reasons, and hope you will tell me. --Philcha (talk) 21:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Daily Star cover.png

⚠
⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Portia fimbriata

Hi, Kaldari. Some of your changes at Portia fimbriata were useful. And I can change the URL for "A qualitative analysis of hunting behaviour in jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae)" if there's no DOI. But your changes like "pages=117" to "page=117" are wrong, as these are the total length of the books. I use "pages=large number" for total pages and e.g. "page=56-57" if I use only 1 page or set - if I want multiple groups of pages, I use {{r}}. AFAIK RefTools interprets the params as I have suggested, see ref to "A qualitative analysis of hunting behaviour in jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae)" Portia labiata. --Philcha (talk) 09:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter

We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are New Zealand Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and Russia PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Scotland Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 11:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Portia fimbriata

You have not responded to my commeents last night. --Philcha (talk) 11:40, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLove bug

Hello,

I see you are in charge of the WikiLove extension (great work by the way). I noticed a bug and was wondering if you could fix it.

The image for the Graphic Designer's Barnstar is wrong. It is currently using the Rosetta Barnstar image.

Thanks! InverseHypercube 23:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hi Kaldari!

I appreciate a word of support. I've been dealing with attacks for days. (As I mentioned with "I'm not a saint", some complaints have been justified, but it's really been out of hand.)

I won't describe how grateful I am, but you may guess as deeply and profoundly as you can imagine and you will be correct.

Thanks again,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 02:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RefToolBar

Hey,

Can you please help me to implement refToolbar at ml:wp. We have done all the steps mentioned on Wikipedia:refToolbar 2.0#Porting to another wiki but still no luck. Appreciate your help. --Anoopan (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'm not going to have time to help with this any time soon. Perhaps you could ask User:Mr.Z-man. Kaldari (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slow page loads

I noticed that you quoted Template:Bugzilla on the delete for {{times}}. I had a look at the bug and they appear to be focusing on the {{cite}} templates but there must be more to the problem then that family of templates as I have problems on pages without any {{cite}} style templates. The problem has to be templates in general as the pages I have problems with are those that have lots of {{Coord}} template calls in them, see the set of List of United Kingdom locations, a number of which retain the older template as they will not load with {{Coord}}. Keith D (talk) 16:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I've changed the bug summary accordingly. Kaldari (talk) 17:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I have not got a Bugsilla account to update myself. Keith D (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :)

Thanks for the barnstar. :)

Some baklava for you!

Jacobbotjacob (talk) 11:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Don4of4's talk page.
Message added 17:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Don4of4 [Talk] 17:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Atlanta californiensis

You seem to be an editor in good standing and an administrator to boot. Then I can't understand vandalism to the article Atlanta californiensis, where you write that this snail is 5 miles long ([9]). Or has your computer been used by someone else using your username ? I haven't given you the normal notification of an act of vandalism (intentional false information), because I can hardly believe that you would do this, but rather give you a friendly notification. I have now edited the article by adding some data. JoJan (talk) 13:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Donky Kong list organization

Hi- I just wanted to follow up with you regarding the discussion at Talk:List of Donkey Kong video games#List organization. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kaldari&oldid=446333271"