User talk:SatyrTN

I will reply on this page unless you request otherwise
Please watch this page if you comment

This talk page is automatically archived by User:MiszaBot_III. Any sections older than 15 days are automatically archived to User talk:SatyrTN/Archive 12. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Random personal notes

• Spencer Carlin

List of LGBT people pages: (on 2008-01-21)

Letter(s)	Size	Number entries
A	39K	135
Ba-Bh	33K	117
Bi-Bz	34K	131
C	44K	169
D-E	41K	155: (121 + 34)
F-G	43K	157: (70 + 87)
H-J	45K	161: (108 + 13 + 40)
K-L	49K	169: (77 + 92)
M	38K	129
N-O	22K	66: (42 + 24)
P-Q	33K	107: (100 + 7)
R	38K	119
Sa-Sc	26K	69
Sd-Si	22K	61
Sj-Sz	32K	99
T-V	43K	135: (80 + 4 + 52)
W-Z	53K	161: (140 + 2 + 7 + 12)

WP:AUS tagging

Hi there Satyr, WP:AUS is now waiting for you at User:Moondyne/AU categories. The false positives and dupes have been removed and {{WP Australia}} is the relevant template. If the article is already tagged as a FA and GA, then please set "|class=FA" also. Thanks again, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 08:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Blnguyen! I see that you, Moondyne, and Dihydrogen worked on the list - was there discussion with the project someplace? I was unable to find it. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 13:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians'_notice_board/Archive_28#Australia_related_article_growth is a bit. I could bring it up again if necessary. There is also some chat on Moondyne's current page so at least a fourth Australian agrees with it. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 22:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind, post a quick note? Just to make sure no other bots are doing the same thing, and to give people one last chance to review the cats :) Many thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. Definitely no other bots, otherwise we wouldn't have been looking about so long....Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 03:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we have a consensus now. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 00:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Blnguyen! I did 100 categories last night, and I'm doing 500 tonight. I'm sorta easing into it because this is a *huge* job - 4,000 categories is a bit! In any case, do let me know if the project gets any notices, complaints, or otherwise due to the bot. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not picking up any articles! Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it fixed? Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 03:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be running just fine now. Guess the API got itself together :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's jammed at the moment, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I have it programmed to stop if anyone leaves a message on its talk page. Just in case it hits an icy patch and runs away. In any case, I replied to Hesperian and nudged the bot into continuing :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Can we fire up the next round please? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The current run was quick....so the bot is waiting for its master to allocate some more work :). Thanks for hte VN run yesterday. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Happy Easter

And thanks again for helping Jeff with his page. I couldn't do it, really, because of the COI issues I have with him. --David Shankbone 15:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings from the Opera Project again

Hi, Satyr. You'll remember that you and your bot did some excellent work for us (on the Wagner sub-project) a few months ago. How are you fixed at present? We'd like to dip a bigger toe in the assessment process by automatically giving a "Start" rating to those articles that are tagged with the Opera Project banner and are not already classified as Stub.

Exceptions: articles which have been promoted to Good Article, Featured Article or Featured List should show those ratings on the banner. Also, it would be good if any articles which currently show Stub on the banner but have been manually de-stubbed without the banner having been altered could be rated Start.

We'd like the facility to comment when we start doing the assessments. For the Wagner project, you organised it so that the banner carries a dormant link: if a comments page is present, there's a link, but if not, not. The link will nevertheless appear (and work) if a comments page is subsequently added.

I can give some examples of the various possibilities outlined above if that would help, and you might like to review our correspondence about the Wagner project to refresh your memory of what you did then (also to refresh your memory of how useless we were then at specifying what exactly we wanted, maybe!).

Hope to hear from you when you have a moment. Best. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 01:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

what up homegirl

So I was reading about WP:PR and WP:GA. I'm trying to get Clarence Lightner (and eventually Leonard Hall (Shaw University) to GA status. Should an article be a certain length to get that status? Lightner is kinda short compared to some articles, but what's on there is just about all the information I can find on him. I know they will never be a FA, but GA is good enough for me and I want to have one of those under my belt. Is it better to ask for a peer review before nominating the article for GA? I don't know if you've contributed to a GA, but I thought I'd ask. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 23:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Some people will tell you PR is not worth it. IMHO, though, PR is to get users in the WikiProject to take a look at the article. GA is to get users outside the WP to look at it. And FA is when everyone agrees it's good :) So I recommend it.

That said, I haven't gone through much of either. I've FL'd five lists, but that's a *much* less rigorous process. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AND1 logo.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AND1 logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Converting images to PNG

Hello, SatyrTN. I've noticed you've been converting some images from JPEG to PNG recently. While I appreciate your effort to improve these images, I don't think your method of converting the JPEGs directly to PNGs is very helpful. The main problem with JPEGs, when used for text, screenshots, maps, diagrams, flags, and other images with sharp edges and big blocks of solid colors, is that the JPEG algorithm introduces compression artifacts into the image, which are practically invisible in photographs but stand out as "fuzz" in non-photographic images. These compression artifacts allow JPEG to produce smaller file sizes for photographs, but they don't help much for non-photographic images, for which PNG is a better choice. When you see the {{badJPEG}} or {{ShouldBePNG}} tag on a JPEG image, it generally means that the JPEG compression artifacts are distracting in the image, or that a smaller file size could have been achieved if the image had been originally saved as a PNG (usually both). However, when you simply convert the JPEG image to a PNG, the compression artifacts introduced when the file was saved in the JPEG format are still there, resulting in a fuzzy-looking PNG. Worse, such compression artifacts often cause PNG to produce a much larger file size than the original JPEG! So the best course of action is to recreate the image from scratch, or find a version of the image which has never been saved as a JPEG and save that as a PNG. This will result in a clean PNG image, often with a smaller file size than JPEG would have given.

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload for more information, especially the section called "Do not save diagrams as JPEG". Let me know if you have any questions. —Bkell (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Banner Shell

Well thanks for you willingness to help. The thing that turned me off about that template was the fact that, try as I might, I could not get rid of a space after the first item when I placed it on Talk:Ronald Reagan. I was going to put it in my sandbox to show you what happened, but that didn't work. So if you would like to check it out, place

{{WikiProjectBannerShell |1= {{USP-Article|class=FA|importance=High|nested=yes}} {{WikiProject California|class=FA|importance=Top|nested=yes}} {{WikiProject Cold War history|class=FA|importance=Top|nested=yes}} {{WPBiography|living=no|class=FA|priority=High|politician-work-group=yes|listas=Reagan, Ronald|nested=yes}} {{WPBiography|living=no|class=FA|priority=Mid|filmbio-work-group=yes|listas=Reagan, Ronald|nested=yes}} {{WikiProject United States presidential elections|class=FA|nested=yes}} {{WikiProject Radio|class=FA|nested=yes}} {{WikiProject Illinois|class=FA|importance=Top|nested=yes}} {{ChicagoWikiProject|class=FA|importance=low|nested=yes}} {{WP1.0|WPCD=yes|class=FA|nested=yes}} }}

over the WikiProject Banner template and all of its contents in the editing screen and preview it. When I did that, a big space appeared. How to I get rid of that? Happyme22 (talk) 01:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. When I try that, either on an article or in a sandbox, I don't see any problems. Now, I'm on a Mac using Firefox, so there's the outside chance it's an IE issue. And another outside chance the problem was in one of the interior banners, but has since been fixed. I have occasionally seen a space show up between individual lines, which is usually because someone added or changed something on one of the banners. I don't see it now, but let me know if you do and I'll follow up. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

You know what? I tried it again (exactly what I placed here) and it worked. Thanks a lot for your willingness to help me. --Happyme22 (talk) 06:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help - and if you find any others that do that, let me know? It's easy for an extra line-break to creep in when someone makes a change to a banner. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:32, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gucci Gang controversy

Simply counting raw !votes, and excluding those of the SPA's I tagged (Lenoil odarama does have contributions outside the topic, and from several months previous, so I'm assuming good faith on him) the discussion came out to 7 keeps and 4 delete (counting your nomination). Looking into the discussion itself, the arguments for deletion could be summarized as a violation of WP:NOT#NEWS. While that is a valid concern, this was refuted by the keep arguments - that there is sufficient referencing to justify the article, the article expands beyond the scope of a simple news article, and there is precedent to allow such articles. 9/11 was a horrible example for the last argument, however, I'll give you that - but WP:OSE does acknowledge that "other stuff exists" arguments can be validly used in this manner, as it was by Starczamora with Edison Chen photo scandal. The bottom line is, there was a clear consensus not to delete the article, but rather to continue to expand it and improve upon it as necessary. I hope this explains things. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

My decision stands. Simply because the article isn't getting expanded any further does not mean it should be deleted. We don't punish articles for being stubs, and certainly not starts, as this one is. If you still feel the article should be deleted, I'd recommend bringing the issue to deletion review. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

TrashMail

You removed the speedy tag from this article- can I just ask why? We were discussing the matter on the talk page, and the author has failed to bring forth any reliable sources. Would you mind if I deleted the article, or are you seeing something I'm not? J Milburn (talk) 13:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty standard for articles to be nominated for deletion within seconds of being created, that's the nature of new page patrol. And yes, I realise Wikipedia has no time limit, but that doesn't mean we can have useless articles sitting around for days at a time, though I do take your point that this article is nowhere near as bad as many. I do sort of resent the speedy tags being removed when I was in the process of asking the user for reliable sources, but I'll trust your judgement and give the article the benefit of the doubt. J Milburn (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

That first statement worries me a whole lot. And I don't mean this personally - as in you worry me - but rather the process worries me. That means it's standard practice to WP:BITE the newbies, something that goes against the very nature of Wikipedia. I'm not criticizing you here, and I have no clue if something needs to change (or what), I'm just writing down a few thoughts that came to me reading your statement and wondering if that really is "standard process". -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Case law

Hi SatyrTN! The difference between Category:LGBT case law and Category:United States gay rights cases is simple: the second category only deals with US cases, whereas the first deals with LGBT cases all over the world. As you can see, the first category includes a 1998 LGBT case in South Africa as well as a 1997 LGBT case in Ecuador (I created both articles in the last two days). Of course, the category is not yet very populated since it has just been created, but I intend to create several other articles about LGBT cases to populate it (in fact, Wikipedia already has many such articles which I have not yet categorized and which perfectly fit in this category). Regards. BomBom (talk) 15:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Can we rename one or the other, then? To make them match? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't think you would reply on your talk page. Yes, indeed, using a standard heading would be more useful and coherent. I think "LGBT" is broader and thus better than "gay". I just created a new subcategory Category:LGBT-related European Court of Human Rights cases. However, I don't know how to rename categories. Does it have to be done manually or is there another, more efficient way to do it? Regards. BomBom (talk) 18:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it has to be done manually. I agree that "LGBT" is broader and is better for these cats. What about the US one? Looking at the other parent cat, perhaps it should be renamed Category:United States LGBT-related case law? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Colorado Library Consortium

Greetings, You deleted my Colorado Library Consortium (CLiC) article. 04:11, 18 March 2008 SatyrTN (Talk | contribs) deleted "Colorado Library Consortium (CLiC)" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance)

Colorado Library Consortium is a nonprofit organization and is partially funded by the Colorado State Library/ Colorado Department of Education so it does not fit the A7 criteria listed above. Will you please republish my article? I also sent in a copyright permissions letter. See below. Thank you, Shannon O'Grady

To permissions-commons wikimedia.org, I hereby assert that the I and the Colorado Library Consortium staff created and owns the exclusive copyright of WORK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Library_Consortium_(CLiC) We agree to publish that work under the free license LICENSE GNU Free Documentation License v 1.1, 1.2 We acknowledge that we grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs. We are aware that we always retain copyright of our work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to us. We are aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and we reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc. We acknowledge that we cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. Colorado Library Consortium staff Shannon O’Grady, Assigned Wikipedia Agent

Waiting for an answer on this... Shannon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shannon8r (talk • contribs) 00:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Shannon - I left a message on your talk page. The short version is that, since it's a copyvio issue, I don't feel comfortable re-instating the page. If you've sent in the correct documentation to en-permissions, then they will be willing and able to restore the page. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Just read my talk page. I emailed a copyright letter on March 24. Any idea how long it takes? Shannon8r (talk) 18:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Shannon

Copy of deleted page User:Contract project management

I tagged the user page above for deletion and you deleted it, but the user sent me the following:

We just had a group University assignment deleted and we are more than happy to never bother trying to use Wiki again if we can have a copy of our document back? Please email j.meiklejohn@student.qut.edu.au if you can help us do that. Thanks

Mind sending the deleted text of User:Contract project management along to him? Thanks. --Calton | Talk

Screenshot G7s

Put simply, I don't see how I can justify their fair use beyond boilerplate rationales. Sceptre ^(talk) 15:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Sera monastery

I'm confused by your request to delete Sera monastery - could you explain what is needed? At the moment it's a perfectly reasonable redirect to a fairly stable article, so I don't see the need to delete. Let me know on my talk page? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

because it is a descriptive and not an actual title, I was going to move the article into that space. Also, thank you for your PNGification of graphics! (and if I recall correctly, your cleanup of my stub on Marylou Makepeace) Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 20:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The article reads like it's the name of the monastery - one of the "Great three" along with Ganden Monastery and Drepung Monastery. I see that you've moved the other two redirect to small "m", but all three articles still refer to the places with cap "M". I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just wondering at the moves you made/want to make, and wondering if they're necessary. A quick Google Books search turns up a large percentage with cap "M". Maybe we can get another opinion at WP:TIBET or WP:BUDH? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've no vested interest in it one way or the other, to me as an English teacher, though, it just looks off, I wish I could describe it better. If I'm off, sorry. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 06:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

And I have no clue. I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tibet#Monasteries - hopefully someone there knows :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Ummm...

Any chance of a reply on my Opera Project post up above before the 15 days are up and it gets archived? Not trying to hurry you, but... --GuillaumeTell (talk) 01:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean your post from four days ago? That I've been resolutely procrastinating on? =D

Part of the reason I haven't responded is because I'm in the middle of a 4,000 cat run for WP:AUS. Another part of the reason is you've asked for quite a lot, some of which is already programmed, some of which isn't. I have to parse it out and write out a response. But ping me again in four days if I haven't responded - I'll try to get my act together :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the goings-on in the merry old land of Oz. There is absolutely no hurry for us, and we're grateful for any help we can get. I was just worried that it had dropped off the radar. Thanks for the reply! --GuillaumeTell (talk) 12:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing Template:Wikiproject Israel. I wish I knew where to take problems of that sort....--Relata refero (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Well, I got pointed to it at the Template talk:WikiProjectBannerShell page. I suppose the Village Pump (technical) is also a place to go. Or just find your friendly neighborhood template guy to help out =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

re:Re: WikiProjectBannerShell

You stated "all banners in Category:WikiProject banners do have the nested functionality", however you are wrong. Please take a look at {{Wpt}} and {{WikiProject Slayer}}. Burningclean _[speak] 20:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. What exactaly is the category? Burningclean _[speak] 21:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject banners -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Images

You recently removed CSD tags from some images I tagged, you said they are not copyvios. Well they are screenshots from commercial movies that the uploader is claiming copyright of, how is that not a copyvio? Polly (Parrot) 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean the Himesh pics like Image:HimeshAKS.jpg, right?

The images all come from the website himesh-reshammiya.com, which appears to be his "official" site? And nowhere on the site is there a copyright statement. My impression is the director guy is HR4 (talk · contribs), so if he is posting pictures of the movie he made both on his website and here, there's no copyvio. Is that incorrect? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyright is always presumed, only if an image is explicitly released under a free license is it otherwise. How do we know that the uploader is the person who holds the copyright, they'd need to give some proof of this to the Wikimedia Foundation via the normal email permissions at OTRS. You have to exercise extreme care with commercial images like screenshots especially when the uploader is claiming copyright, it's crucial that due diligence can be shown otherwise the Wikimedia Foundation leaves itself vulnerable to legal action from any copyright holder who's feels aggrieved by a misappropriation of their commercial rights. Polly (Parrot) 22:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I stand corrected. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You were assuming good faith of the editor concerned, which is commendable in most circumstances, but when it comes to copyright the onus should always be on the claimant to prove their case. To do otherwise would lead to Wikipedia being swamped with copyvio images. Polly (Parrot) 22:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess I understand. That one looked valid, but I understand what you're saying. Thanks for clarifying :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problems, copyright is a minefield, caution is always best. If the uploader wants the images included in the article they could always use a fair use rationale, though with that number of fair use images in one article I think they'd struggle to justify them all. Oh and apologies if my initial message seemed a bit snippy, I was just a bit rushed when I posted it. Polly (Parrot) 23:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

NP - I'm leery of pic speedies because I know so little about them, so I really appreciate the explanation. Tks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:WP:PACKERS

You told me to tell you when I would like to have the bot run per my request here. Well I'm ready for it! Thanks a whole bunch. I also had a question on whether or not you could also have your bot do another request, this being just a one-time request. I was wondering if you would be able to search Category:Green Bay Packers players and Category:Green Bay Packers coaches and make a list of all the articles missing an Infobox. I figured that you could just search the articles for the string "Infobox" and any articles that miss it could be placed on an appropriate sub-page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Green Bay Packers/Infobox needed). Then the project could go and place the appropriate infobox on the articles. Well let me know if this is possible and if you would be interested. Thanks a million again for your help. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 07:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Gonzo! I'm a little behind at the moment. The bot is a little over halfway through a 4000 category job for WP:Australia, and I have a WP:Opera job after that. I'll put you on the list, but ping me in a week to make sure I don't forget :) I may be able to do the report today, though - that shouldn't take any effort. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a ton for your help! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 03:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's your one week ping! :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Bochica

You deleted Bochica. I restored it. You wrote that there was not enough context to identify the subject. As one who had never heard of it, I quickly identified it by entering Chibchan in the search box. And there are google hits.

Don't just delete articles because you don't understand them without having exerted any effort, especially when your reason for not making the effort is just that you're unwilling to do so. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Bite the newbies and get rewarded with an adminship

And please note that you're being talked about at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow. What an amazing amount of WP:AGF you have! Thanks for being understanding, and for asking questions when another editor does something you don't agree with! You're definitely making Wikipedia so much better by your actions!

To explain myself, WP:CSD#A1 says "Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article." The version of the article that I deleted was one sentence (thirteen words a couple of them mis-spelled). That fits the "very short" part. And when I read that sentence, it says something about him/it being a god for some people I've never heard of. That fit the unable to identify the subject of the article part. Evidently another editor agreed, since they had tagged it with "db-nonsense". So I'm sorry if you don't agree with my action, but kindly leave off harassing me with "not willing to do work" and such. We're all trying to make a better encyclopedia, and my 12,000 mainspace edits show that I am willing to make an effort. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I am well aware of which version it was. It's the version that I restored. It seems to me that you are the one who failed to assume good faith, when you treated the entry as worthless. "Some people you've never heard of" were identified instantly by entering their name into the search box. How hard is that? You didn't want to do even that much. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I can see that no matter what I say, or how I insist that the "article" fit No-Context, you're going to disagree and say that mop-wielders, who are simply cleaning up when other editors have marked the speedy, should instead take it upon themselves to write FA-class articles when given one non-sentence. I'm sorry we disagree. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Inclusionist?

On your userpage you claim to be an inclusionist, but you are really bent on deleting Joshua Plague. What gives? ;-) Yilloslime (t) 20:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, I might need to take that off. I'm more of a Darwinist/Inclusionist - Give it a chance, but make it work to survive =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I see, I see. Yilloslime (t) 20:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, so what do you think about my point about the bands listed here? Seems to me like if Joshua Plague non-notable, than there's no way many of the bands listed there are notable either, e.g. [1],[2],[3], and I doubt this problem is limited to KRS bands. Are you going to AfD or PROD all of these too? Yilloslime (t) 22:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a read of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - in short, the presence or absence of other articles is not a factor in deciding whether a particular article should be deleted, it's a non-argument. If a subject is notable, the article can stand on its own merits according to WP:NOTE, if not it gets deleted - period. FlagSteward (talk) 22:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Flag, I can't help but think that you didn't look at my post above very closely, since the first diff is to a comment in which I say I am fully aware of the caveats in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.

But anyways, SatyrTN, my post was not arguing for Keep, which I've done elsewhere, but rather questioning your future plans, which, in retrospect, probably isn't very useful. I guess I'm just frustrated that out of sea of poorly sources/unsourced articles about blatantly non-notable bands and musicians, you've singled out Joshua Plague—an article that's in much better shape than myriad others, and that's about someone much more notable than myriad others. (And maybe you haven't singled out Plague, and are AfDing all kinds of bands, I haven't checked your contribs.) I really wouldn't care (and probably shouldn't care) except that I've actually put a bit work into the article. And, of course, I do think he's notable, though I also admit that in googling for material for the article, I've been surprised by the relative paucity of information on him/his bands on the internet. I suspect that part of the reason for the relative dearth of info is that his most notable band (MK) was most active before the tubes of the internets really took off, but still, I think there is enough to establish notability by WP standards.

I guess my point is, if you are on a "cleansing WP of non-notable garbage" streak, and this Plague article is simply swept up in that, then that's fine, I can understand that. But if you've singled this out for some reason, then that's frustrating. Even if it weren't a policy, I can't help but WP:AGF since you are such a prolific, solid, and civil editor, but that just makes it harder for me to wrap my head around the singling out of this article in the face of so much lower hanging fruit. Don't you have bigger fish to fry? I see I have rambled on. Sorry. Yilloslime (t) 00:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Hi, Yilloslime! I ran across Plague and Mukilteo Fairies because of the LGBT WikiProject. We have an on-going project to make sure every person categorized as LGBT has appropriate RS citations, partly to help create List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, and partly to cut down on vandalism, and partly to abide by WP:BLP. Plague is in Category:Queercore and Category:LGBT musicians from the United States, so he's on the "to-do" list. When I started looking for a reference for his being gay or bisexual, I realized there was a lack of WP:RS material. That's when I prodded it, that's when you added quite a few references (though I question their RS value), and at least the article *looks* much better. You mentioned that Plague is pre-interweb - are there any good books or movies that might be able to help? I've searched Google Books, but probably not very thoroughly.

So, a bit of my own rambling later, I'll conclude by saying I'm not on any sort of clean-out-the-chaff kick. Of the articles you mentioned, only Mecca Normal comes close to being anywhere near my normal subjects, so I probably wont run roughshod over any of them :) Sorry for being such a bother, and I hope there's no hard feelings. Happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely no hard feelings. I'm just venting my frustration. It's not fun watching something you've worked on get deleted. (Although the AfD ain't over til it's over.) Yilloslime (t) 02:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

ITU-T etc.

Hi, you deleted the article Malcolm Johnson (Director) a couple of days ago, even though the talk page mentioned the article was built from material released into the public domain. In such cases, you're supposed to (short version) instruct the editor to mail permissions-en at wikimedia dot org, to show that they're authored to use the content.

Furthermore, you blocked the account based on the username policy, without any warning, or reasoned discussion. People are usually very open to eg. username changes, but simply notifying them they've been blocked with a template is a horrible idea. In a case like this, when dealing with a representative of an organization, you'll end up creating bad publicity for Wikipedia, and drive away knowledgeable contributors. So in short, I'd appreciate if you undeleted things, listed it on WP:CP instead to wait for a confirmation e-mail, and unblocked the user, while leaving a comment about the naming policy instead. Or barring that, I'll do it if you want that instead. Thanks. - Bobet 23:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Bobet! You seem to have some knowledge about either the person or the ITU. Here's the timeline and my reasoning:

When I came across the article, it was tagged db-copyvio by User:Delicious carbuncle. I read through what was there, and parts of it were copied, though I didn't examine the article fully. It had been previously tagged copyvio (the day before) by "Delicious carbuncle" and deleted by User:DJ Clayworth. Furthermore, it was a single edit that had an infobox, a photo, full wikilinks, and eight refs (though almost all of them to the same page). My impression when I looked at it was that it was an advert-type of article that was re-created periodically.

I don't know a whole lot about copyvio, but I'm reluctant to restore the article. WP:CP says to list there "If you are not sure who originally authored the material," but we do in this case. I'm totally willing to let the user know about WP:DCP, but if you know more about copyrights, you may want to chime in. And if you really feel it's okay to restore the article, I will, but I'm a tad reluctant.

As for the user, I'm willing to unblock, but the WP:USERNAME says "Use of Wikipedia for promotion of a company or group is not permitted, and accounts that do this will be blocked." This seems to be a username editing an article strongly related to the company, and in a way that could be considered "promotion". I'm totally willing to unblock and request a username change, and will do so now. The user has made a few significant contributions, mostly images, in the past six months, so perhaps the block was unwarranted. But I'm very concerned about this being a group account doing promotional edits.

Let me know how else I can help. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reasoned reply and the unblock. I usually wouldn't mind a COI block, but I looked over the account's edits and they've posted stuff on article talk pages for comment before putting them live. The ITU-T is the standardization part of the international telecommunications union, which is an intergovermental organization working under the UN, so I'd hope there's not that much reason for them to push a POV. However, I've the same problem with you with the account's name and the comment on its userpage, since the account does appear to be shared, which is specifically not permitted, and can really lead to problems when an account is representing a large organization. I hope the comment you left on their talk page will fix that (unless they left for good after the block). - Bobet 11:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think they've left for good. I got a long email as well, right after unblocking. Just because I'm curious, how did you run across the situation? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I have the page H.323 on my watchlist and saw someone add categories to it. Then I thought, "I'm sure that page had categories before" and looked at the history, saw the username there (they'd rewritten the whole article a while back and forgot to include categories) and looked at their contribs, talk, and saw that they were blocked. Or something pretty close to that. The point of the story therefore is: always use edit summaries. (Because otherwise I probably wouldn't have noticed the diff or looked at the history on H.323) - Bobet 16:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Carolena Nericcio article

ChaosBaby (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you for your comment! I have re-written the article, would you mind taking a look?

It is taking me a while to get my head round how everything works on wiki, I keep getting tagged for things accidently before I even get chance to spot and change my own mistakes, Hope my revised article is ok. Let me know, take care ChaosBaby (talk) 02:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Carolena Nericcio

Hello. She invented an entire style of dance that is now performed all over the world by hundreds of dancers, what is not notable about that? And she has already been written about in several other wiki articles (as being the person that founded the particular style of dance) If users have written articles about dancers who used to be students of Carolena's and are now famous dancers themselves, then surely Carolena is notable as well? You may not have heard of her if you are not a belly dancer but there is not a belly dancer on the planet who has not heard of her. Please review this subject again, Thanks (please reply on my page, cheers) ChaosBaby (talk) 02:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

All the info I added here ---->>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChaosBaby/Carolena_Nericcio <<<-----is from either http://www.fcbd.com/ or other bellydance sources. I have added all the references and websites on to the above link. Is that not enough info? I added all the details about where she is from and the websites i got the info from ChaosBaby (talk) 02:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

ChaosBaby (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello, I think I have sorted everything now. I have edited my Carolena Nericcio article and it now contains the links from various sources to prove her notabilty, as requested. Thanks for your help Please could you check it and confirm everything is ok on my talk page, thanks ChaosBaby (talk) 20:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

advice?

Hey Satyr, I know you saw Leah's post about BeBe K'Roche, since you gave her the commons link. <bok bok! Ummm... anyway> I think her idea about userfying it seems reasonable, but I'd like another opinion. What do you think? Aleta ^Sing 02:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I suspect userfying would be fine, though I'm not sure it needs to be. It asserts notability and has one semi-RS on it. With a tiny bit of work it could be a "Start"-class article. My fear about userfying is that Poetiik might be a one-off editor - sie only made three edits while here, this being one of them. If the article is userfied and sie doesn't come back, it will languish in userspace. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You make good points. I'll leave it in the mainspace. I found one other issue of the same newsletter to cite. There doesn't seem to be a lot else to use for sourcing. It does sound like maybe it should be notable, but I'm not finding much. Oh well, thanks for looking at it! Aleta ^Sing 16:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Bisexual TV shows

The L Word is a lesbian show, but it does have major bisexual characters, as does Torchwood. I'm pretty sure most of the first season of the L Word is dealing with Jenny's bisexuality. Alice's bisexuality is kind of important to her relationships too. The catagory I've made is bisexuality-related tv series. I'd say Torchwood, with all it's bisexuality, is pretty bisexuality related. Even if it's not the central theme. The show has an lgbt category, and would you argue that that's not important to the show either? The producer Russel T Davies stresses the importance of the show as a drama before fantasy, just as with Doctor Who. Bob & Rose is a mini series that revolves entirely around the issue of a Bob's bisexuality. So does Portrait of a Marriage. It's the whole theme of A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila. I understand that there aren't a lot of shows where bisexuality is an fairly frequent issue, but I argue that definitely with these shows, it is. Enough so that they are 'bisexuality-related'. Also, you said, "Even Torchwood, where all the characters are bisexual, it's not a central issue to the show." I'm not sure what you mean by that. Does it not count because they don't talk about it? Or they're not oppressed for it? I mean, it's a fairly important part of Jack's life, and it's definitely an important part of Ianto's drama in the show. It's pretty blatantly shown that traditionally, members of Torchwood aren't monosexual, and that's a fairly significant portion of the drama. Without it, a lot of things would be different in this show. Andral (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand that bisexuality is present on a lot of the shows - let's take Torchwood, since it's the only one of the lot that I've seen :) So yes, all the characters are bisexual. And being bisexual is part of the characters. But it isn't important to the series. They don't talk about being bisexual. They don't have to come out to their parents as bisexual. I don't even think the word bisexual has been uttered. So actually, I would argue that it's not important to the show. Would you categorize the show with "Category:Gambling-related television series? They gamble with their lives almost constantly. And for The L Word - yes, some of the characters are bisexual, but the series is lesbian-related, right? I guess what I'm getting at is that bisexuality may be significant to a character or set of characters; it may even be a significant part of some episodes, but is it central to the series, which is what the cat is for. And given that question, is it a common enough theme - or even "notable" enough - to warrant its own cat? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Obviously I think it is. So if you want to nominate it for deletion, that's up to you. But I don't think your arguments are particularly valid. Just because the characters sexuality isn't socially problematic, doesn't mean it's not important to their development. The show is catagorised as a drama, meaning the dramatic elements, not just the sci fi, are important. Would the fact that they're all bisexual only matter if someone said "Hey guys, we're all bisexual!"?Andral (talk) 19:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You're totally missing my point. The category is "Bisexuality-related television series". Can you show me in the description of the series how it is "bisexuality-related"? I've already agreed that several/all of the characters are bi/omni sexual, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any source at all that says the series is bisexuality-related. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, so whether or not some or all of the regular stars are bisexual, it's not bisexuality related unless somewhere says it's a bisexual show? I can only come up with stuff like Russel T Davies saying all characters' sexualities are intended to remain fluid, but that's even quoted on the Torchwood page (or the themes in torchwood page). I mean otherwise all you can get is stuff like this http://www.biresource.org/717, http://www.johnbarrowman.com/outabout/press/2006/GT102006.html, http://www.afterelton.com/TV/2007/9/torchwood . So if that's not enough for you, I don't know how to convince you. But I still don't think that excludes the show from this category.

You know we should probably be having this discussion on the Torchwood discussion, because I really don't believe you're going to convince me, and it'll ultimately come down to what everyone else thinks. Andral (talk) 13:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It's alright. I understand that the category may be "too soon" or not large enough, but I chose the shows I did for very specific reasons, over many other shows featuring bisexuality. These shows majorly feature bisexuality. There are a lot of films and shows that feature homosexual relations that are in the lgbt category that don't mention homosexuality either. Come to think of it, I think the word 'gay' has only appeared in Torchwood twice in two seasons, and both times been made obviously incorrect. Andral (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of user pages...

I recently uploaded an image you might find handy:

The SVG conversion left a bunch of gaps I didn't have a chance to fix... plus I deleted one of his hooves... if you use this yourself and decide to touch it up, feel free to upload your fixes! --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 04:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Why *thank you*!! Where in the world will I put a one-hooved, treed Satyr? Hm - that might take some thought.... =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Commendation

I would like to commend you for your tireless work in making sure that LGBT issues are covered in a fair and balanced way on wikipedia. Well done! Contaldo80 (talk) 09:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Aww! Thank you! That isn't an April Fool's joke, is it? =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:VIET

Hi there. Your bot seemed to forget last Wednesday's run (Wiki time). Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hm. It seems to have run last night, so whatever it was seems to be fixed. But let me know if/when it happens again. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

User account, donation of copyrighted material, and re-deletion of article

SatyrTN,

Please find the user page of ITU-T clarified, with a donation of copyrighted material. Two questions; where can ‘Someone from Wikipedia’ (as written in DCP) be notified about the donation, and after this is done, how can the ‘permission group’ be contacted for re-deletion of the article on Malcolm Johnson (Director)?

16:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC), ITU-T

Hi, ITU-T! I'm not quite sure... I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:Donating copyrighted materials. WP:COPYREQ says the email address is permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org - I would email them for more information. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Haha, oh dear

I found your userboxes very, very funny, especially the conflicting 'I am accused of being a homophobe'/'I identify as gay' ones. Hats off for your comedy. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c

LOLz - thanks! Your username made me giggle, too =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of talkheader by bot

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Talk:English language. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. —teb728 t c 22:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hm. The bot is programmed to recognize and keep {{talkheader}}s - I don't know why it was removed. I'll take a look and see what's wrong. Thanks for letting me know =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

wp:dttr

hey there! i just passed the info along. thank! --emerson7 01:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

;) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

SatyrBot Error?

For some reason, SatyrBot has added the WikiProject:Australia banner to Talk:The Fly (U2 song) and Talk:The Saints Are Coming, two songs which - to my knowledge - have little or nothing to do with Australia. Is this an error by the bot? MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, MelicansMatkin! Both were number one singles in Australia. The bot is going through User:Moondyne/AU categories - a list of categories the project developed. I'm not totally convinced all the articles in Category:Number-one singles in Australia should necessarily be part of the project, but you could leave a message with the project if you disagree. Thanks for letting me know! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed WP Australia from those two articles. I agree that it was a mistake to tag these types of articles with the Australian project template. We're working on fixing this now. Apologies. —Moondyne click! 06:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm removing the banner from "Bring Me to Life" as well. Simply being a #1 single in a country is an extraordinarily thin reason for adding a project banner. Also note that this edit damaged the code (apparently) in its attempt to handle the WikiProjectBannerShell implementation, and removed {{TalkHeader}} in the process. Was that last part intentional? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 08:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Huntster. The bot is supposed to recognize {{talkheader}} and not remove it. I need to do some testing to figure out what's wrong with that. Thanks for pointing it out. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 13:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Uh, I hope your bot was not taking a "short break" because I insulted it. I didn't realise it had feelings, or I wouldn't have sledged it so. Hesperian 14:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, it is rude to alter a bot page - especially when it says right at the top "Please do not remove or change any information unless you know what you're doing." =D

But it's actually taking a break because I'm traveling for a couple days, and I need to fix the "talkheader" issue that has annoyed several people :) So no worries! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I was running a script on the Flora of Australia category subtree, and one of the last things it did was list all the categories that appear on any of the articles in the subtree. Since that page was tagged into all those categories, and some of them were in my subtree, all those other categories got added to my list, and I was left wondering "WTF? Which plant article is also a Men at Work album?" Hesperian 00:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - that made me giggle =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Kentucky Fairness Alliance NPOV Question

Hi! I was wanting to get your opinion on a section of the Kentucky Fairness Alliance article. The section discussing disputes with the Kentucky Equality federation seems to me to be very POV, and as much as I would personally like to delete it, some of the statements made in that section are factual. What are your thoughts on ways to fix that section, or should the section jsut be deleted? --Antcjone (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not fond of much of that article. I dealt with it a little, but the whole thing needs some TLC. Perhaps take out the person's name, and maybe the quote? That would leave the factual info while not pointing fingers. Just my $.02 :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to spend some time on it tomorrow and try and give it a little rehab. Thanks for your input!! --Antcjone (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course

My apologies I was removing deleted categories for WP:CfD, and I realized that those categories were re-added by the users and there is apparently no policy on re-adding deleted categories, so I stopped when I read that. Again, so sorry for any inconvenience. As for the XHTML-ing, I do that automatically in article namespace, and it was a holdover. Prior to your message on my talk, I have also removed that rule from AWB. Thanks so much for your note. -Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

How come I got another tag for vandalism? I thought i had fixed the problem? ChaosBaby (talk) 21:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ping!

As requested! In fact, more than four days have elapsed and it looks as if the Australian project has finished - any progress to report to the Opera Project? Best. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 10:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I miss NC

Look familiar? :P This guy films interstates, highways, roads, etc. in NC and a few other places. This brought back memories of driving home everyday after work. The video ends right before you get to Wake Forest Road, the exit I took to my apartment. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

William Jarvis, Weathersfield

Hello again, my friend. Many thanks for all your help. I have one small niggling question that I'd like to run by you if you don't mind. I made a contribution to an entry on Weathersfield, Vermont, in the 'notable people' section. A fellow deleted the entry (although he left my contribution about it on the history section intact), and basically challenged the fact that the individual was important by noting that the person didn't have a wikipedia page. Well, my experience is that just because someone doesn't have a page on wikipedia doesn't mean they're not important. :-) In any case, by and large I've found people here very courteous about this sort of thing. Before I knew what I was doing, I made an entry on the Fox Talbot, the inventor of photography. Rather than delete it outright, a person pleasantly asked me to substantiate what I'd posted. Thanks to you, by then I knew how to footnote. I went back in and added the appropriate footnotes, and the entry stands as I wrote it. My (longwinded) point is that it would be nice if before people simply delete, they at least run it by you and give you a shot at authenticating what one has written. Is that too much to expect? Just curious..... Again, many thanks for all your help.MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Courage

You need to grow some balls. I know you live in Vermont. It's probably very cozy for you as a gay person in Vermont. That's not the case for gay people in most of the world. I've seen you on a lot of articles removing things about gay individuals. Stop denying gay history. The last thing gay people need is one of their own fulfilling the straight supremacist ideology that every is or should be straight.