Jump to content

User talk:Masem: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 248: Line 248:
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-04-14}} </div><div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2016-04-14|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:46, 14 April 2016 (UTC) </div></div>
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-04-14}} </div><div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2016-04-14|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:46, 14 April 2016 (UTC) </div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Kharkiv07@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=714972288 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:Kharkiv07@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=714972288 -->

== Gamergate improvement ==

I noticed you've been involved in this topic area for quite some time, but that you don't edit the main article much. I'm sure you also see that the current article is a steaming pile of excrement as well. I was wondering if you had any opinions on the best way to go about improving the embarrassment of an article. There's no way I can both enforce and write, and you have a track record as an excellent content creator. If I can help keep the area free of disruptive influence from all the factions, would you be willing to take point on revamping things? <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup>[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]</sup> 17:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:01, 15 April 2016

Template:Archive box collapsible

clarify

I'm not sure if your comment that we don't need to rely on scholarly sources was directed at me, but in case it was, I wanted to say that I agree. I was trying to illustrate the problems with taking that position, not seriously entertaining the notion that we should limit sourcing of the article to scholarly ones. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 19:20, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peyton Manning

Hi Masem. I would support the deletion/suppression of Peyton Manning sexual assault controversy due to the numerous violations associated with it as well. What would be the best avenue to follow to make this happen? I don't mind proposing it, but I'm just not sure where to bring it up. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:53, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this diff [1] should also be suppressed because it refers to Peyton Manning as a "sex offender." Could you please advise me the best way to bring this up also? Mr Ernie (talk) 02:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Mr Ernie on both requests. I see that a non-administrator closed the AN/I thread before an admin could address your recommendation to remove the history of Peyton Manning sexual assault controversy. Tracescoops (talk) 02:08, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted the oversight team about that diff and they suppressed it. Mr Ernie (talk) 14:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Chan (artist), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Full Throttle and Full Throttle (video game) (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) 10:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the image free to use in Commons? --George Ho (talk) 04:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes its only text. --MASEM (t) 04:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

Reference errors on 13 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

You're back to the article. sst✈ 07:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

Someone has by mistake marked File:Sailfish OS architecture.png as a non-free screenshot and as a result Teo's Little Bot has reduced to a very useless size. It is a diagram but cannot be read.

Would you please consider undeleting its original revision?

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've undone that, though recognize in the future that Theo's doesn't delete the larger revision, that requires a human admit with revdel to do; this appears to have been done by @Closedmouth: following the tags Theo's bot put on that (obviously otherwise a proper action from how the page was presented). If this happens again, you should probably ping that admin to get them to help as a first recourse. --MASEM (t) 19:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Okay. Thanks. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since the debate over the use of this image continues, let me direct you to the notification placed on the wikifilm group's MOS dealing with the use of an image in the infobox:

"Ideally, an image of the film's original theatrical release poster should be uploaded and added to the infobox to serve as an identifying image for the article. Poster images can be found at websites such as Internet Movie Poster Awards or Internet Movie Poster Database. If a poster image cannot be found for the film, or if the film did not have a theatrical release, then a cover image of the film's display case (VHS, DVD, etc.) may be used instead."
Please note the following proviso: "In the absence of an appropriate poster or cover image, a screenshot of the film's title card may also be used."
The original screenshot is not a very good image, as it shows Buster Keaton from behind with a title credit superimposed over the image. When another editor notified me that he felt that the image should supplant cover art in the infobox and that it would be "orphaned", as a courtesy, I re-inserted the image into the article. I was careful to provide a rationale for the use of a "non-free" image, linking the "trademark Buster Keaton" outfit that was clearly evident in the photo to the screen persona of the comic actor. I also linked the caption to an authoritative reference source that identified the significance of the clothing that was Keaton's trademark "look". FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:22, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Look carefully at the cover art, isn't this whole issue a "tempest in a teacup"? FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be preferable to use this contemporary "poster" as the infobox image? See: <http://alchetron.com/Buster-Keaton-Rides-Again-65937-W> FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I put the poster up for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 4. George Ho (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Batman (2016 video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Gordon (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) 09:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Organic chem pd-ineligible

Are these PD-ineligible? czar 18:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are chemical structures - data, not copyrightable , in a standard format, so are uncopyrightable. --MASEM (t) 20:00, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

I am taking one last run at getting Emily Ratajkowski promoted to WP:FA in time for a 25th birthday WP:TFA on June 7th. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive3 needs discussants. Since you were a Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive2 participant (images only), I am hoping you might give some comments (at least on the images).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to SCUMM may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • as a package; the reusable interpreter was called SPUTM, the "SCUMM Presentation Utility (TM)"{{efn|"SCUMM Presentation Utility (TM)", which was renamed on shipment of the game to the name of the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited RiffTrax, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High definition (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) 09:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 March 2016

File:BBC Three logo.svg and File:BBC Earth logo.png

Hi Masemh. Would you mind taking a look at File:BBC Three logo.svg and File:BBC Earth logo.png. These seem similar to File:BBC First.png discussed at WT:FFD#Usage of BBC First logo. I tagged them with {{db-f8}}, but the tags were removed by another editor. Any opinion either way? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That user may be right that in the UK, there's just enough creativity on those logos to be copyrighted. But at minimum, here on en.wiki they clearly meet PD-USonly and can be tagged that way. (I've updated Earth to do that, the Three logo was already there). You might want to ask Commons on their take on those logos, if they confirm they're okay on commons, then deletion is reasonable. --MASEM (t) 01:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look Masem. I started a discussion about the Commons images at c:COM:VP/C#File:BBC Three logo.svg and File:BBC Earth logo.png for reference. Do these files still need nfurs now that their licensing has been changed to "PD-USonly"? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:03, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, PD-USonly is "free" under NFCC requirements. --MASEM (t) 02:53, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mystery Science Theater 3000 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • were two official [[fan conventions]] in [[Minneapolis]], run by the series' production company (called "ConventioCon ExpoFest-A-Rama" (1994) and "ConventioCon ExpoFest-A-Rama 2: Electric Bugaloo"
  • = Katie | last = Rife | date = April 1, 2016 | accessdate = April 1, 2016 | work = [[A.V. Club]] }}></ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

This day's This Special Day's article for improvement (day 1, month 4, 2016)

Skvader - Tetrao lepus pseudo-hybridus rarissimus in the wild at Örnsköldsvik
Hello!

The following is WikiProject This Special Day's articles for improvement's daily selection:

Skvader

Please be bold and help to improve this article!


Previous selections: Snipe huntJenny Haniver


Get involved with the TSDAFI project. You can: Nominate an articleShare this message with other editors


Posted by: w.carter-Talk 20:41, 1 April 2016 (UTC) using New improved MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of WikiProject TSDAFI • [April Fools!][reply]

Thanks for blocking that user, but please block them indefinitely. They are an obvious sock of Cow cleaner 5000 based on editing habits. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 03:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why only a 31 hour ban? This is an obvious Cow cleaner 5000 sock. He will just start vandalizing again once the block expires. —Farix (t | c) 03:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar enough with that case to 100% say for sure but I have let ANI know if someone with more awareness can make a better judgement call to override me for this. I was more worried about the disruption and NPA going on than the sock aspect. --MASEM (t) 03:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, 31 hours for all that? You are a leniant admin! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Even disregarding the sock aspect of it, shouldn't they be indefinitely blocked anyways as a clear vandalism-only account? --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 03:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to be more cautious of using the broom. There's now an active sockpuppet investigation going on, and ANI is notified so if a longer block is warranted, it will be appropriately changed; key to me was the stop the disruption. --MASEM (t) 04:02, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
CC5K has a long history of vandalism, usually easily identifiable with its repeated attempts to associate Weekly Shōnen Jump with terrorist groups—either al-Qaeda or ISIS—and frequent personal attacks directed at Koavf, who was the first to identify this individual and its sockpuppets. —Farix (t | c) 04:10, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Metroidvania, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epiphany (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) 16:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vorkuta

Please stop removing my edit which is well-sourced and relevant. Your coatrack claim is your personal opinion, and that is not enough to remove such content. Or perhaps you are an apologist for an authoritarian Russian regime? 202.161.71.234 (talk) 05:16, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the Economist article. It is about how the Russian media is highly controlled. The mine incident is only mentioned as an example (among several others) of how the media doesn't cover internal issues unless they are positive for the media. It has nothing to do with the incident itself, and while the article does say that the incident wasn't covered by the media, it's not helping the reader to understand the incident, but instead to push the issue that the Russian media is controlled (which would be appropriate on a different page, but not here, that's why is a coatrack). If it was the case that the Russian people were upset that they didn't hear about the accident through their own media and some type of followthough, that might be something, but it has no place on the disaster article if the only source that discusses the lack of coverage is one that is critical of Russia's media. --MASEM (t) 05:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The section it is added under is the 'reactions' section. The lack of Russian media coverage is a relevant reaction. It further explains why there was a lack of coverage: to prevent the people from getting angry with their government. Your claim that the sentence is only mentioned in passing in the article, and hence lacks relevance, is absurd. Those other reactions are also taken from articles where they are not the main subject of the article. I am happy to continue undoing your removal, which only benefits authoritarians and their mission to control the info that the masses are exposed to. 202.161.71.234 (talk) 05:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But there's no reaction through. The Economist article doesn't speak to how the Russian people or anyone else in the world responded due to the lack of the coverage on the media. The mine incident was used as one example of probably any number they could have pulled from to demonstrate the control the Russian media has, and thus irrelevant on the mining article except to push a point like the one you are describing ("only benefits authoritarians and their mission to control the info that the masses are exposed to"). That Economist article is great for Media freedom in Russia which is where criticism of Russian's media should be located, but to push that point into any concept touched by the Economist article is coatracking. --MASEM (t) 05:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also to stress: your addition claims something that is not in the article, that specifically the story was withheld to avoid angring citizens. While the gist of the article is that the Russia media withholds stories because they don't want to anger citizens in general, you cannot apply that to make that statement: that is WP:SYNTH. This is why it is a coatrack. There's a lot about the problems with the media that can go on that Media freedom in Russia article, but there's no place (without any additional sourcing) for that on the mine article. --MASEM (t) 05:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

I was wondering if you could help me service File:Autosketch v9 Screenshot.JPG. The file seems to have lost a lot of vital details during some bad downsizing. Can you undelete its past revisions, so I could do the downsizing properly?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 12:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are no previous versions of that file that I can recover (as it was done in 2009, any old versions are likely purged by now). --MASEM (t) 14:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adventure (1979 video game)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Adventure (1979 video game) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind if I help out with this? I put a a good amount of work into that article intermittently over the last few years and had plans to nominate it for GA myself eventually. Cheers. —Torchiest talkedits 15:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have absolutely no problem with help on required GA fixes and hopefully to FA after that. --MASEM (t) 15:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adventure (1979 video game)

The article Adventure (1979 video game) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Adventure (1979 video game) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 16:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adventure (1979 video game)

The article Adventure (1979 video game) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Adventure (1979 video game) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 17:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2016

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 9, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2016
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2016, the project has:


Content


Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Let's Play (video gaming), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Concrete Jungle (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) 09:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Guidance Barnstar
For explaining what I needed to know so clearly, comprehensively, and promptly. Many thanks. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Do you think you could restore this image? It was deleted after being incorrectly removed from its article, Space Quest III, a few months ago. I asked the admin who originally deleted it to restore it, but I just realized they haven't been around for almost a month now. I've got the spot it was in commented out for the moment. Thanks. —Torchiest talkedits 19:11, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Torchiest: should be back now. --MASEM (t) 19:16, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, sir. Looks good. —Torchiest talkedits 19:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thats an ecumeni...

...RE Sim City I totally agree that sort of cruft shouldnt be in the article, but it is a content issue for discussion on the talkpage rather than a question of sourcing. If the argument the editor (who wants to remove it) makes is 'its not reliably sourced!' its a terrible argument as the product itself stands as an unequivical primary source that is verifiable by anyone. I generally stay away from Videogame (and media in general) articles for that reason, as cruft-arguments always devolve into 'I think it should be in!' 'I dont!' 'Waaaaghg'. Now excuse me while I go back to dying in Dark Souls III for the 30th time since yesterday. Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:19, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Only in death: obviously with the closed discussion the point is moot; however, as a member of the VG wikiproject, we actually do have pretty good guidelines of where to draw the line between what is reasonably appropriate to include about gameplay that meets the concept of a general encyclopedia, and things that are clearly better suited for a gamefaq or strategy wiki, and when things should be sourced or not. At least most of the articles I've seen actually don't devolve into issues of what gameplay is appropriate or not, it tends to be more on story and plot side aspects. --MASEM (t) 23:09, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure (Atari 2600) has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Masem. Adventure (Atari 2600), an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you knowDYK comment symbol. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 23:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

Gamergate improvement

I noticed you've been involved in this topic area for quite some time, but that you don't edit the main article much. I'm sure you also see that the current article is a steaming pile of excrement as well. I was wondering if you had any opinions on the best way to go about improving the embarrassment of an article. There's no way I can both enforce and write, and you have a track record as an excellent content creator. If I can help keep the area free of disruptive influence from all the factions, would you be willing to take point on revamping things? The WordsmithTalk to me 17:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]