User talk:Netoholic

Talk pages on other Wiki's - simple, meta

Add a new section

---

Motivation

"They are never alone that are accompanied with noble thoughts." – Sir Philip Sidney (1554 - 1586) "To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. – Elbert Hubbard (1856 - 1915)

---

Database compression

Can't currently undo that compression but compression of en hasn't progressed very far yet and I will try to dodge compressing those types of pages if that's readily practicable - as you say, they typically are small and have few revisions. Jamesday 18:43, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

To get one of those pages deleted:

1. receive an actual copyright infringement notice or complaint from a copyright holder or other legal notice from an appropriate party which indicates that blanking and protecting for a few months is not sufficient.
2. point a developer to that notice so a developer can act appropriately.

Jamesday 06:30, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A followup on this: I've modified the database compression code to support excluding certain namespaces and am currently running the concatenated compression to exclude templates, categories and their respective talk pages. All pages prior to Bv in this run plus all from the previous run aren't affected by this change and may have revisions compressed with concatenation but there shouldn't be more (barring a human not adding the restricton clause to the job). Jamesday 23:43, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Simple Logo

Hi,

creating a transparent logo from a non-transparent one is a lot harder than just using the existing transparent one as a template. I would ask you to keep in place the Simple Logo I created, in order to maintain the distinction between the projects, until a better replacement can be found.-Eloquence* 19:21, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)

New footnote proposal Wikipedia:Footnote3

Hi; I've seen that you are created the {{fn}} and {{fnb}} templates. I've made a new proposal which is designed to allow automatic numbering. I wonder if you could comment or have any suggestions? If this turns out to be the "one" footnote system for the future, I'd also like to discuss about converting existing pages and eventually changing over the existing templates to use the same system. Mozzerati 13:55, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)

Hey :-)

We got off on a rocky start, but I've come to value your contributions around here. It unfortunate that you're so misunderstood! I hope that people don't start treating you like a troll. Cause I'm concerned about that, I've put a very brief message on Jimbo's page asking that he make sure you get treated fairly. Hope you don't mind. Good luck with everything Neto. I'll miss ya. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:58, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Talk page revisions

Net -- I'm on IRC right now and just replied to some points on the injunctions. Please contact me there ASAP if you are on or on AIM. --Wgfinley 19:03, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

block

I am not saying that what you did was either a revert or not a revert, merely reporting the fact that you were blocked (iirc it was Blankfaze who blocked you. I am not an administrator and can't block anyone). At the time I spotted that you hadn't been unblocked, but evidently now you have. I will look again at the block log and that page and see if I feel I need to add any more to my evidence or rephrase anything I have previously said. Thryduulf 11:10, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

TfD

I was unclear in my clarification - I meant that you had not linked James's comments in the TfD discussion, which was the really important discussion, since it was the one that went 11-2 in favor of keeping the template, and the one that had the weight of official policy behind it. I'll make that clearer on the page. Sorry. Snowspinner 17:22, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing something, but all of James's comments in that discussion look to be made after the fact, and in support of keeping the template. Snowspinner 17:44, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

OK. but my point stands - nowhere in any of the TfD discussions did you respond to the requests for Jamesday's sayso on the badness of those particular templates, and it appears that, for whatever reason, Jameday's opposition to those templates was/is limited. Snowspinner 18:09, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

I've never actually said the templates were good. In fact, as I look at it, I think I agree with you on it - there are better ways to do it. I just wish that you'd presented that case in a way that didn't alienate as many people. In all seriousness, if you find yourself in a situation like this again, please feel free to drop me a note on my talk page explaining the situation as clearly as you did here. I'll see if I can keep disasters like the one that sprung up out of this issue from happening. (And I'm not being faceitious here, I swear. If your position is as reasonable as it is here and is going as badly as it did here, I really am willing to do what I can to help you.) Snowspinner 20:17, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

Arb Case

Net -- talked to several people today on the case, need to talk to you asap, contact me when you are able. --Wgfinley 03:12, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Calendar templates

Have you really edited any of the templates beyond 2005? The templates created from 2006 to 2025 are non-meta-templates, and I created them in advanced so that no one would pull the same trick with the 2005 templates. See Template:MayCalendar2006Source for an example. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Talk, great plan!

Nice to hear from you :-) I'm going to have to fwap you a bit I'm afraid (wear a helmet), but maybe we can go from there and get productive. I'm typically on irc during weekdays at 18:00 UTC or so, sometimes a bit earlier, sometimes a bit later. Sometimes I'm on at additional random times in weekends too. And you can always try at 18:00 UTC eh?

Finally users JRM, PZFUN and Oscar have my number; so if you see them but not me, you can ask them to phone or sms me to come online. I don't think they'll mind... much. :)

Hope to speak with you soon!

Kim Bruning 12:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Recusal reason?

You have asked me to recuse several times, but, despite me repeatedly pointing out you had provided no justification when you did so, you continued to ask providing no justification. In fact, you still haven't - just blank assertions. We are now down to just six arbs on the case, so I am definitely not going to recuse just for the asking (and never mind the horrible precedent that would set to be abused by some of our more creatively antisocial ArbCom defendants, as I'm sure you'll see if you look back through AC history). What was your actual reason? With diffs. - David Gerard 19:42, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Template:Commons

I didn't even realize it was protected. The earlier edit to which I was referring was, in fact, identical to my recent one (not counting my reversion of User:RicKk, a sockpuppet/impersonator of some sort), i.e. I removed the same six words. I have no opinion regarding meta-templates, and to make any edit relating to that dispute while the template is protected would be an abuse of my rights as an administrator. User:Rdsmith4/Sig 23:02, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The English cricket season

Hi,

As you've seen I've started to create what will probably end up at about three dozen encyclopaedic articles on the English cricket season that has just started. As part of this, details of various games could go into up to four articles - one on the season as a whole, two on the teams and another on the competition. Such an approach is only possible if there is a way of inserting the same text in a number of different articles. Without that facility, such a series of articles would be too time-consuming a task: every time a comma or typo is changed, or every time someone changes one article - either all four would need to be corrected or they would go out of kilter.

Thankfully, Wikipedia has the technology to allow this. It will allow us to adopt an approach and report on the English cricket season in a way that no-one else does. We can report thoroughly and in an encyclopaedic manner that differentiates us from the rest.

This is why I am using "transclusion", and also why I should be grateful if you would allow me to continue to use "transclusion" without reverting. In this instance it will be to the benefit of Wikipedia - greatly improving our cricket coverage. Kind regards, jguk 18:45, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)