User talk:Kaldari

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Kaldari! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Dowry

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Netha Hussain's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rater

importScript('User:Kephir/gadgets/rater.js');

KITTENS

Seanbobe's cat has given you some kittens! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companions forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else some kittens, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kittens}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message.

Ada Lovelace, une

Guess what my three contributions to the have either been either removed or balderized. Eg. Third paragraph started with Ada's mindset was not only different for the 19th century...

Is Wikipedia what it says, that anyone can edit? Especially someone who has written over 20 articles, 4 books, from Scientific American to Oxford Dicitonary of National biography. It seems that the editors on this page need to be removed and before that Mr Woolley needs to carefully cite original sources, not just me, but Elwin, Moore, Marchand etc.

Please add the citations and go back to my previous edit and please add my contributions.

B.A. Toole (talk) 19:16, 10 November 2013‎ (UTC) "<SineBot>"

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

A question about Popular Culture Lists

I have a new question about Popular Culture sections.

Going around Wikipedia, I noticed the "Roy G. Biv" article which has a list-style popular culture section. It is shown here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROYGBIV It seems to be well-received and it the editors don't seem to want to delete it. However, the popular culture of "The quick brown fox" seemed to be frequently deleted and restored, until it was removed for good. I understand that prose-style pop culture sections, like the one on zombies, seem to work well, but I want to know what is the difference between the Roy. G. Biv pop culture list, and the Quick Brown Fox pop culture list, being that both are lists of disconnected facts?

Roy G Biv link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROYGBIV

Quick brown fox past edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_quick_brown_fox_jumps_over_the_lazy_dog&diff=prev&oldid=567566743

What makes Roy G Biv better than Quick brown fox?

OxbowsLake (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

@OxbowsLake: If it's going to be a list, it needs to be a definitive list. If it would be impossible to make a definitive list, it needs to be prose. For example, it would be impossible to list every use of zombies in popular culture, so a list would just be random examples. At least that's my take on it. Kaldari (talk) 21:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Jesus

"as the definition of "builder" is not normally distinct from "carpenter"", well yes it is, in countries where houses are not mainly made from wood, like Palestine. Johnbod (talk) 03:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

@Johnbod: That may be true, but most of our readers are not Palestinian, so I imagine the sentence will be confusing to many, as it was to me. Feel free to revert it, though, if you feel it was important. Kaldari (talk) 03:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Or perhaps it could be changed to "stone builder"? Kaldari (talk) 03:26, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Please

Two things. Could you please ask a user prior to accusing him/her of a massive copyright violation? This is a public domain, as has been discussed with User:Coren and included in the list operated by his bot. I could easily explain if you asked me. More important, could you please respect WP:Outing? Privacy is not a very serious consideration to me, but I still prefer to appear as an anonymous user. Please oversight the record where your indicated my real life name, which was at best unnecessary. Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 06:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: Yes, after doing more digging, I discovered that InterPro is considered public domain. In the future, I would suggest crediting sources that you copy material from, even if they are public domain. That will prevent any confusion. I apologize for not asking you about it first, but I didn't discover your active account until after I had already posted the accusations. It would be helpful if you linked from your previous accounts to your currently active account. I'll see if I can delete the revs that include your real name. Kaldari (talk) 06:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

During creation all these articles included the required reference to public domain (This article incorporates text from the public domain Pfam and InterPro IPR021091, as for example in here). Otherwise, the article would be automatically detected by CorenBot and deleted. I usually checked InterPro texts to fix errors. This all comes from here, which I believe is beneficial for the project. However, I already exhausted my limit of time and patience... Happy New Year! My very best wishes (talk) 07:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: That statement is not accurate. The article that started this mess, Cytochrome c oxidase subunit I did not include such a notice until I added it yesterday. It was not until I checked several more of your articles that I saw the notice and realized that the source was public domain. Kaldari (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I probably missed it for this protein family when combined the initial text from two program-generated files. Sorry, my mistake. My very best wishes (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Now, speaking of another copyright issue [1], this is kind of complicated. These files have been actually deleted on Commons, although one of admins there suggested a deletion review later if I am not mistaken. I do believe the copyright holder was Jamestown foundation because the paintings were published by Jamestown foundation, and they wrote: "yes, you can use them" [in Wikimedia]. Also, three images were initially placed on wiki by this user who posted the following quote from his email: You do have our permission. Just be sure to mention Jamestown as a source in the Wikipedia listing, and reference us with a web link to the paintings in your posting. Use this email as our special authorization. Thanks, Glen Howard, President, Jamestown Foundation, 6/14/2006. If we can AGF this (and I also checked that they allow using these images), this should be enough I hope... My very best wishes (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

@My very best wishes: I replied at the deletion discussion. Kaldari (talk) 19:07, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Content from DV Page

Could you explain to me why the content that I added to the Domestic Violence page earlier today was removed? Your comment says that I was "conflating two completely different statistics in a way that is contradictory and confusing." What two statistics was I conflating and in what way was it confusing?

DGAgainstDV (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@DGAgainstDV: See the talk page. I was just about to message you. Kaldari (talk) 22:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Is it time for a periodic FAR.

Hello User:Kaldari, Your Talk entry listed an interest in "Major Depressive Disorders" which has not been reviewed since 2008 and which is listed for "WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology." Is it time for a periodic review and could you list it? BillMoyers (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Steatoda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black widow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: History of women in Puerto Rico

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Talk:History of women in Puerto Rico.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Salticidae species

As I tried to point out several days ago, this AFD is incomplete because all you've listed and tagged is the master index. None of the actual list pages, such as List of Salticidae species (A–C), are tagged or included in this nomination, so as it stands it's not going to accomplish anything, and there's no argument for deleting the index but not the actual lists. postdlf (talk) 22:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Postdlf: I know, I keep meaning to add the other articles, but I just haven't had time. Kaldari (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Infobox template

Hey, I reverted your edit to {{Infobox}} because it threatened to break everything. I'm guessing it was a mistake? {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Nihiltres: Oops, definitely a mistake. Thanks for reverting! Kaldari (talk) 23:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem; I'm glad it only lasted a minute or two. I've been updating the parameters used in some infoboxes (specifically, clearing out this category) and had a real rush of adrenaline when I saved four pages and got "{{{data}}}" garbage all through the newly updated infoboxes. :P {{Nihiltres|talk|edits}} 23:14, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

@Nihiltres: I had the exact opposite experience. I was setting up a bogus Infobox template in my local MediaWiki instance (to play around with mobile styling) and I decided to just copy one of the first versions of the en.wiki template. A co-worker started talking to me about SVGs in the middle of it and distracted me. When I finally saved the template and tried to use it in an article, it wouldn't appear. It took me about 5 seconds to realize what happened, and I'm sure you can imagine the rush of adrenaline I had myself once I realized that I had broken {{infobox}}! Luckily you had already reverted it at that point :) Kaldari (talk) 23:23, 10 January 2014 (UTC)