User talk:Risker

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back. On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog Stats for pending changes trial Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Cases Category:Wikipedia semi-protected pages Useful things for me to remember or I will never find them again, plus archive links Column-generating template families The templates listed here are not interchangeable. For example, using {{col-float}} with {{col-end}} instead of {{col-float-end}} would leave a <div>...</div> open, potentially harming any subsequent formatting. Column templates Type Family Handles wiki table code?† Responsive/ mobile suited Start template Column divider End template Float "col-float" Yes Yes {{col-float}} {{col-float-break}} {{col-float-end}} "columns-start" Yes Yes {{columns-start}} {{column}} {{columns-end}} Columns "div col" Yes Yes {{div col}} – {{div col end}} "columns-list" No Yes {{columns-list}} (wraps div col) – – Flexbox "flex columns" No Yes {{flex columns}} – – Table "col" Yes No {{col-begin}}, {{col-begin-fixed}} or {{col-begin-small}} {{col-break}} or {{col-2}} .. {{col-5}} {{col-end}} † Can template handle the basic wiki markup {| | || |- |} used to create tables? If not, special templates that produce these elements (such as {{(!}}, {{!}}, {{!!}}, {{!-}}, {{!)}})—or HTML tags (<table>...</table>, <tr>...</tr>, etc.)—need to be used instead. Notes [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] {{subst:User:Alison/c}} {{subst:W-screen}} Wikipedia:SPI/CLERK Note to self: Research Laura Muntz Lyall (or persuade one of the Riggrs to do so), consider writing an article about the Forster Family Dollhouse in the Canadian Museum of Civilization. Some day. Emergency desysops The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. Other note to self re "emergency" desysops: Spencer195, Marskell, Cool3 - Level 1 Hemanshu - committee motion, mischaracterized as "emergency desysop" on noticeboard, desysop occurred minutes before the motion passed. Sade - to check "involuntary per arbcom", Feb 09 RickK/Zoe - July 08. Long dormant admin accounts, shared compromised password. Eye of the Mind - Dec 07. Main page deletion. Shreshth91 - done at request of single arbitrator, Aug 07. Vancouverguy - Jun 07. Long dorman admin account, apparent compromise. Yanksox - Mar 07 - Jimbo desysop, confirmed by Arbcom in full case (DB deletion wheel war) Robdurbar - Apr 07 - mass blocking, self unblocking, deletion. Wonderfool. Husnock - Dec 06. Admitted shared password, desysop confirmed by Arbcom in full case. Messages below please Raise your hand if you can define "authority control" Hi Risker—long time! Hope things are well with you. I appreciated not being completely alone in the opposition section of the RFC on "authority control templates". That RFC seems likely to be so self-selecting as to be non-informative, even more so because it is about a very undramatic topic. The question I didn't properly ask (rhetorically) is simply: "How many people who view a Wikipedia article can define 'authority control'"? Not one in a thousand. But now we're putting a template about it on every biography, implicitly telling the reader that "this box of mystery links might be useful to you". The only one of those authority control links that is quickly understandable to a general audience, much less vaguely useful, is WorldCat. Versus e.g. (1, 2–in German at that!, 3–huh?) The silliness of further cluttering articles with this stuff—the type of action that should only ever be justified by reference to improving the reader's experience—is such that calling it a bad idea doesn't even seem like an opinion, yet only two people see it that way? Astounding. More importantly, it's happening within the context you alluded to in the RFC. As the en.wp editing base has a tendency to consolidate toward a technically oriented group, their interests subtly move the edits being made on en.wp, on average, toward "form" as opposed to content. (This might be forgivable if one really believed that the encyclopedia was "complete"!) Some of us have been quietly concerned about this trend for years, of course—whether it's about the scope of bots, the overuse of maintenance templates, etc.—and aren't talking out of our hat, as these instances demonstrate. The "business requirements" of this project are increasingly being invented by the back office, if you will, rather than being driven by readers. (In this light the initiatives of the WMF, such as academic partnerships and user experience testing, look... very important.) I declined to comment further in the RFC. When someone is asking you to explain "what value would be added to wikipedia by preventing users from being able to [access these links--but insert anything here]"... well, that train of thought is just a little logically problematic. I came here to write the first few sentences; sorry for the longer unsolicited opinion. Take care, Riggr Mortis (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC) I love your longer unsolicited opinions: they're always well-considered, and I think you've hit the nail on the head in this case. It was a losing battle, but I think the heading you've selected says it all. I can also see that you remain a copy-editor at heart. ;-) I think I'll go delete some PRODs and find an article to improve, that will make me feel better... Thanks for popping by, it is always a pleasure to see your name on my watchlist! Risker (talk) 03:34, 29 July 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia seems to be pretty successful at recruiting those who want to exert authority over the diminishing number of those who simply want to write. Doesn't really make any sense. Malleus Fatuorum 04:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC) Grey's Anatomy Hi, Risker. I've been searching for a good copyeditor for the above article for a long time now. The first one given by the GOCE was not satisfactory, by the opinions of myself and several other users. So then, I was instructed to find a copyeditor who has copyedited at least one featured article. I found several users, but I received extreme delays and no response from them. I am writing to you after two months of searching, to ask you to copyedit the article. I am preparing it for FAC, and once copyedited, the peer reviewer deemed it ready to go. After reviewing your user page, I realized you are exactly the editor I was looking for to copyedit Grey's Anatomy, being that you've copyedited a television related article that is now a FA. I think some of the article's problems are: MOS:LQ issues, quoting issues in general, wording, comma under/over usage, and run-ons. It is written in American English (hope that's okay), and I would prefer the context to be changed as little as possible while being copyedited. I really hope you can copyedit this article, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC) Well, I'm a tad rusty (Arbcom seems to consume much of my wiki-time), but I have read over the article and see room for improvement. If it is alright with you, I'll chip away at it starting in a day or two (need to give it a really serious once-over). I usually leave notes for the primary editor on the talk page of the article, and will refer to the comments from the PR in going through. It's a pretty long and dense article and, as such, will take a while to get through. Like Ruhrfish, I did not regularly watch the series, so this will be an education for me as well; the advantage of not being familiar with the series and characters is that one can spot where the text needs additional clarity for the uninitiated reader. Risker (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC) Great! Thank you for agreeing to copyedit. Currently, I am doing a bit of expansion, but will be done in a few hours. Thanks again, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC) Also note that there are two main characters with the last name 'Grey' (Meredith and Lexie), which is why I refer to them by first name throughout the article. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC) No worries, TRLIJC19. I've read through the article a couple of times over the last two days to get a feel for it, and to get some ideas of how to help improve it. I'll start with phrasing and word choice, but as we progress, I will likely have some recommendations about organization. Risker (talk) 20:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC) That's great. I was a bit uneasy about the organization, so recommendations would be helpful! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC) Just to clarify, are you starting today or tomorrow? Granted, we may be on a different time zone (I'm on EST and it's currently 8pm). TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 23:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC) Starting in about 45 minutes (I am on ET as well so we're on at the same time). Just have to finish up a few family matters. Risker (talk) 00:03, 2 August 2012 (UTC) Thanks for letting me know! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 2 August 2012 (UTC) Quick question. You said the copyediting would take long, but do you have some sort of rough expectation of when it will be done? I obviously don't want to rush it; it's just that medical school resumes in September, and I am hoping to nominate it at FAC before then. It's certainly okay if I have to nominate it later, but I will be able to respond to comments at the FAC much faster if the nomination is sooner. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC) I've got a target completion date of August 12 in my mind (that gives two weekends for more intensive work), so that should fit into your agenda. If we're able to pull that off, I'll be happy to follow the FAC and help out with any prose issues that arise, although this would be your nomination and you'll have primary responsibility. Does that work for you? Risker (talk) 04:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Yes, that's earlier than I expected to be honest. :-) TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Hi, again. I recently wrote a new section (Broadcast history), because I finally found enough information for it, and a new subsection of reception (Impact). I hope you can begin copyediting the article again soon, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 01:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC) Sorry, I've just got back online after weather interfered with my availability today/tonight. Ah, the joys of hot sticky days and evening thunderstorms. I'll be working on it shortly. Risker (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC) I hear you; I lost power last night while developing an article, and had to rewrite the whole thing. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC) Hi, Risker! Are you planning on doing any copyediting to the article tonight, because if you are, I'll remain online for a while to address any questions regarding the copyedit/article. I completely understand if you don't have time tonight, though. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC) You might as well hit the sack tonight; I'm working on it offline and won't post it until tomorrow. Sometimes it's a bit easier to work with this stuff in Word when one is rearranging things. Plus the font is nicer... Risker (talk) 04:25, 9 August 2012 (UTC) Great, I'm excited to see it tomorrow! TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC) Overdue Apology Hi, Risker. I just realised I never got around to this. I said some pretty harsh words to you over the whole NewtonGeek thing. I still feel that could have been handled better, but you didn't deserve the scathing criticism I bestowed on you during that episode. I'm sorry I went overboard. - Jorgath (talk) (contribs) 20:14, 2 August 2012 (UTC) No worries, Jorgath. I don't know if you saw my "response to all" with respect to that block; in trying to address one type of concern, it turns out I touched off a different debate entirely. What I keep coming back to is that there was very little dispute about my stated reason for blocking the account ("not here to build an encyclopedia"); it's a shame that the community keeps letting itself get pulled into these kinds of dramas. Risker (talk) 20:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC) Note Hi. I made some observations at Usertalk Jimbo Wales, and they included mention of you by way of analysis, FYI. Alanscottwalker (talk) 20:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Commons Over on Commons, Tip beat me to whacking those photos so I endorse with a tationale since he didn't leave one. PumpkinSky talk 10:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC) User rights for the Education Program extension Hi Risker! The education program team (which I just rejoined, as basically the community liaison) is trying to reconfigure the user rights for the (soon to re-deploy, hopefully) Education Program extension. I've started a discussion here, and thought you might like to participate. If there's anything I can help clarify or that you have problems with, let me know and hopefully we can work it out. I know the timeline (figure out the rights configuration by Friday) is quick, and I apologize for that.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 17:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Talkback Hello, Risker. You have new messages at Dcshank's talk page. Message added 06:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.  :- ) Don 06:21, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Hello, Risker. You have new messages at Dcshank's talk page. Message added 02:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. You'll never guess what I found on my talk page.  :- ) Don 02:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC) Advice requested Hi Risker. If I recall correctly, you've had some dealings with Jack Merridew/Br'er Rabbit before. Could you please advise on what action you feel is appropriate for dealing with this sort of nonsense? NW (Talk) 03:47, 9 August 2012 (UTC) You should have left it alone. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 03:50, 9 August 2012 (UTC) Oh for heaven's sake Br'er. You know better than that. Go ahead and put it on your user page or something if you want, but that kind of absolute mess on a talk page turns off everyone else who tries to edit it. You've invested uncounted hours in developing templates that don't totally overwhelm the editing window....and then you pull a stunt like that. It's behaviour like this that just embarrasses those who have invested their own social capital in trying to keep your detractors neutralized. If you want to make personal statements, please don't use another editor's RFA to do so; that's staggeringly inconsiderate. Risker (talk) 04:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC) Plip! Preceding unsigned {{minnow}} added by Br'er Rabbi 06:25, 9 August 2012 (UTC) [6][7]