User talk:Ktr101

User	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Userboxes	Awards	New pages	Humor	E-mail	Logs	Moves	Uploads

File:Mass CAP.gif

Hey Ktr, I found File:Mass CAP.gif in the CAP images category, and was wondering if you still wanted to keep it around. It is currently unused, and since the Mass patch was uploaded and added to the main article, I'm not seeing much use in keeping this header around. I can move it to Commons if you can find a use for it, but otherwise it would probably be good to slap a {{db-author}} deletion tag on it. Let me know what you think. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Ktr, I'll take care of the deletion. In the mean time, *please* don't category images locally when they are on Commons. It can cause confusion and unnecessarily populates local categories with files that don't even exist here. The CAP images category links to the Commons category, so that's all the linking we need. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:06, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Categoriless? I just checked and all had categories at Commons. If you mean that when you clicked on the image locally, and saw no category, that's because they don't actually exist here at en.wiki. Totally normal. They're just mirror images of the files at Commons, and thus wouldn't show categories here. When you added the categories to those images, you were actually creating brand new pages here, again, since they don't actually exist locally. I'll remove those local categories. As a further note, there's even a speedy deletion rational to deal with exactly this situation: CSD F2, "Corrupt or empty file, or file description page for a file on Commons". — Huntster (t @ c) 20:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you back me up?

SuaveArt has edited his post on the Wikipedia Review and is now lying about me. Did you see the actual post there before he changed it so you can back up my cut-n-paste of what it said? Seregain (talk) 07:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, if not, don't worry. I just found definitive proof that he changed it. Seregain (talk) 07:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Checkuser request

Hi, currently "Seregain" is stalking me claiming that me and "notarepublican" and "suaveart" from the WR (which he linked) are 3 different people, but he hasn't shown evidence and has been proven to have lied in his OP in the ANI thread (I pointed this out). Please file a checkuer on me and these 2 users above to clear this up (later I'll file a formal request against Seregain myself, but if you'll take care of the 1st step I'd appreciate that - thanks).--94.136.35.108 (talk) 07:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Close

Hey, you closed in the exact same minute (18:44) as I supported. No, I am not challenging the close as it was clear where it was headed and as mine was more a moral support, but you have to admit that is ironic, no? Have a good day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Just a question are you an administrator? I was under the impression that only an admin can close an RFA. ZooPro 01:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I would have at minimum liked to have seen my rfa run its full course, i find it rather obserd that you could make a decision in only a matter of hours. ZooPro 01:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Ski

Just read your message. I think it may be viable to rename the project. That said, even though it "looks" uncontroversial, you might see some surprises. Just hope someone do not bring skier vs. snowboarders crap. (See Poaching (snowboarding)) SYSS Mouse (talk) 03:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:RfA cheatsheet

I believe you meant to nominate the cheatsheet page proper and not just its talkpage? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: A call to stop unilateral indefinite protections

Hi Kevin, thank you for your reply to my proposal.

In order to avoid diverting and dominating the conversation, I am going to reply here to a tangential point you have made, if you don't mind.

From the looks of it 124, you seem like you would be a great asset here. Have you put any thought into creating an account? - I am glad you valued my contribution, thank you. However, I think you have made a couple of erroneous assumptions in this remark - apologies if I misinterpreted your intentions.

I do have an account. In fact, I have many. I have been contributing to Wikipedia and MediaWiki for quite a few years under those accounts, as well as under my (dynamic) IP addresses. Over time, however, I have practically stopped using the accounts and now almost always contribute as an "anon". One of the reasons is that I was intrigued by the fact that, as an IP, I received a completely different treatment by editors and admins than I did as an "established editor". In my experience this is getting worse, and I think that IPs are still too big an asset for WP to close its doors to. I do understand that watching a vandalised article and reverting vandalism is boring and time-consuming, but I am convinced that we can come up with tools that alleviate this chore. Bots, tags and filter are going in the right direction - but I digress.

That's why I edit as an IP now, and that's currently my main contribution. I stand here for all IPs who I have seen being treated unfairly, with prejudice, didn't know where to appeal to, and left the project in disgust.

See, even your comment betrayed you. You seemed to assume that an IP could not possibly be "a great asset" at WP. Why not?

I think all "Wikipedians" should try editing as IPs from time to time. Just for one day or so. Do everything you would do normally, only as an IP. And as soon as an abuse occurs, highlight it and, failing that, report it. It's fun! :) 124.100.40.131 (talk) 07:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)