User talk:Kat: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:46, 30 September 2010

RFPERM

Don't worry- I gave you the reviewer flag way back on 13 June. Courcelles (talk) 08:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the first stages of the rollout we weren't going on requests- we flagged several thousand editors off a database report. That was several days before the feature actually got turned on, so it would have just been one item on your watchlist... and if your watchlist is anything like mine, one item is very easily missed. Courcelles (talk) 08:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Accidental Error

Hi there. I wanted to reply back and say that I accidentally deleted said content, as I believed myself to be in Wikipedia's "Sandbox". I am extremely sorry for my mistake and was working hectically to undo it (I am new here, and am unaware of any quick, generally possible solution for such an error) until I recieved your message. Again, I apologize deeply. Thank you and regards, Angel Chante (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Non admins are more than welcome at ANI ;-) Especially when they're making helpful, constructive comments, as you were in this thread. TFOWR 15:24, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. :-) --*Kat* (talk) 15:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright attribution when splitting

Hi *Kat*. Noting your post at the help desk and following the links to what you've been doing, it appears to me that you have not complied with our attribution requirements when performing the splits, and thus violated copyright. We need to be able to follow a split from both ends of an article's history so that anyone can easily follow the trail through the edit history to see who wrote the content. So when you perform a split, you need to state what you've done with a link to the new article, and when you post the material at the new place, the same—state what you've done and provide a link back where the content came from. This is really important stuff. Please see Wikipedia:Splitting#Procedure. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hello and thank you very much for the welcome! It's an interesting thing - I ran a search on Google Books, and for the most part the phrase "Scottish Language" is used to refer to Scots! So I guess I was wrong in my assumption that reference to Scots Gaelic as "Scottish" is commonplace. It's a good thing that user happened to spot it. Gaoidheal (talk) 23:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Selective And Partisan Use Of Wiki Pillars Lack Credibility

The reasons for revising the previous entries were selective interpretation of the Wiki Pillars.

Several sections of this wiki entry blatantly break the Wiki Pillars but have been left intact.

Until the "rules" are applied fairly and evenly through this Wiki.

Any editorial decision based on them is suspect at the very least.

You are of course entitle to do what you like (and are allowed to do editorially)

But I am challenging the current editorial decision.

I consider it to be deeply flawed and lacking in credibility.

And will do so to the highest level.

86.44.85.89 (talk) 10:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EDITORIAL "MUTUAL AGREEMENT" IS A WIDELY ABUSED CATCH ALL CURRENTLY ON WIKIPEDIA AND SO LACKS CREDIBILITY TOO.

How many editors came to the same conclusion about the "impartiality" of the by now infamous Saddam Hussein entry here on WIKIPEDIA..?

Many did miraculously as the same time and all agreeing the same.

Completely separated from external and internal (Wiki Management) influences too apparently..

They apparently agreed the entry was indeed "impartial" and it's sources were suspect to say the least.

(It is basically a love letter to Saddam frankly as anyone who has read it will all too clearly see..)

But for "various reasons" it was left in it's current state.

The editorial "mutual agreement" was and still is used as the main justification for it's continued presence.

Of course there are numerous examples of this almost angelic "mutual agreement" on a host of controversial wikis too.

It might mean something amongst the Editorial Staffers but cuts little ice out in the real word with the reader.

86.44.85.89 (talk) 10:57, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to join us...

...over here to work on cleaning up those lists. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 15:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear of the Kosovo hassle

Sorry you had hassle over edits to the Kosovo article, as you'll probably know by now your work wasn't lost in that you could always retrieve it by using the edit history to go to an earlier version, click on edit and copy your preferred version into a text editor. Discussing extensive edits first is a good idea, and pretty essential where the talk page shows continued arguments. I've accepted that it's often best to patiently take things one step at a time, and where appropriate post the proposal on the talk page first before implementing it, but that's not always feasible. Good luck anyway, glad to advise if you want my (by no means definitive or universally accepted) suggestions, dave souza, talk 20:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC) And thanks for the suggestion on the CRU emails talk page! . . dave souza, talk 20:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Article on Rajiv Dixit

Thanks for you concern regarding the article. I had tried and added some sourced content and had also added verified sources the the existing contents so i don't think that we must really hurry to remove this article as it looks well suited to be on wikipedia and so i think that the deletion tag must be removed. I invite you on the talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rajiv_Dixit of the article if you still find any major issues in the article. Regards --Sandeep (talk) 11:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The List

Wow, you put in a lot of work on List of war films based on books (1775–1898) last night, I'm very impressed! It's looking much better. --Beloved Freak 08:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!! There is still more to do though. The vast majority of the references are notes about how such and such author won some sort of prize for their work. I also left in most of the foreign language films on the chance that they really are war movies. But we'll need to get those pages translated. Google has a good service for that so it shouldn't be mission impossible.

On an unrelated note: I'm surprised the article's owner hasn't had anything to say about all the work we have done on it.--*Kat* (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think this one is going to be the "model". I've fiddled about on some of the others, but not made as much progress as you have, so when you feel it's kind of "ready", maybe we could ask people from the Film and Military History projects to take a look and see if they can see any obvious ones that shouldn't be there. We can/should also ask User:Varlaam to take a look and ask for any suggestions. I still have hopes that he/she will feel able to contribute and work with others on the lists. I'm hoping he/she is not just biding their time and geting ready to do a big revert! it's always harder when people are reluctant to communicate, but changes needed to be made, and you've done a really good job on it.--Beloved Freak 16:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gimme an hour or so to get the horn tooting refs out and then feel free to bring the Film and History people in.

If Varlaam does do a big revert he'll have some 'splaining to do. And we can always revert back. That's one of the nice things about WP. Nothing is ever really lost.--*Kat* (talk) 16:29, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. :) --Beloved Freak 16:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

done. --*Kat* (talk) 17:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've spread the word... hopefully others will come and give their opinion. I've also asked Varlaam again to join in discussion... who knows?!--Beloved Freak 09:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good deal. --*Kat* (talk) 10:06, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

template:last edited

Hey, I saw you did a bold edit and tried to fix Template:Last edited by. Unfortunately the result was that template stopped working all together and just showed your name wherever it was placed, so I reverted back to the old version. Yoenit (talk) 21:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that it was all *that* bold of a change. I posted a request to make that change over a week and a half ago and, seeing no objections, made it today. I'm sorry that it broke the template though and glad that you reverted it. In otherwords....Oops.--*Kat* (talk) 01:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi. I closed an Afd you had opened on a village. Kindly read Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Places, especially the part about villages. That might help. Do contact me for any clarification. Warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 05:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's not why I nominated the article for deletion. I nominated it because the article said NOTHING about the village. It spoke only of the province.--*Kat* (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Not a problem. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 04:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Republic of Texas

User:Republic of Texas was not blocked for having a promotional username. Are your criteria for changing categories correct? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hotcat goofed on me.--*Kat* (talk) 02:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

D*mn auto tools. :) Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Hello *Kat*, Thesevenseas has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Set Sail For The Seven Seas 323° 44' 30" NET 21:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Darius CCI

Hi. :) I very much appreciate your helping out with that CCI. I know it's terribly repetitive work. :/ I'm just going through reverting the ones that the bot has blanked that have already been checked, and I see that you found the copyright infringement in Carey May Edge and marked the CCI page, but had not removed it. I'm not sure if this was an oversight or if you were just unaware that we're supposed to remove the copyright problem when tagging the article. Your tag means nobody else will look at it, and we want to be sure to clean it up. :) No harm done in this instance, as I've yanked all the creative content,but if you know of other articles that might be marked "cleared" but still contain copyrighted text, please make sure to fix them. Thanks again! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moonriddengirl.

I'm happy to help, but am not (yet) entirely comfortable with the cleanup aspects of this task. I'm not entirely sure what to do or how to do it, yet. If its just a paragraph, that's easy enough to remove, but otherwise, not so much. Which is why I HAVEN'T been editing the articles unless it is to add the "copyright infringement" tag. Instead, what I have been doing is researching the article for copyright infringement (something that I AM good at) and then, if and when I find some, I leave a note on the CCI/Darius page about WHERE I found the infingement so that other editors, more experienced with CCI than I, can clean up the article.--*Kat* (talk) 03:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the copyright infringement tag to it is just fine. :) After a week, it'll come up at CP and one of us (probably me) will handle it. The only problem would be if you marked the CCI and didn't tag the article, since then we'll all just go, "Oh, Kat's had that one!" We'd probably say that even if you left a note after your tag clearly saying, "I didn't clean this." Speaking for myself, I very rarely read the notes that follow those markings. They're really there in case anybody ever wants to review the record and see what was found in any given case.

If you feel like it, you know, we have lots and lots of copyright infringements that you can search for.:D (Oh, so many of them. :/) Being good at finding them is all the qualification you need. I understand not feeling entirely comfortable with the cleanup aspects of the task. I've been doing this pretty much full time (my job leaves me with a lot of time on my hands) for over two years, and I still sometimes hesitate to be bold about it. The sheer volume of the work has forced me to get ruthless, but it's very much not in my nature to just casually gut an article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hi, I have a large amount of changes to make on behalf of University of the People and Shai Reshef. I have tried changing the pages a few times but the changes have been rejected by you. I tried using the sandbox but I cannot succeed. I need help in editing these pages. Can you please help me with this issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taliagw (talk • contribs) 20:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think I remember this. What sort of content changes (specifically) are you trying to make? --*Kat* (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I represent University of the people and Shai Reshef, and we need to make many changes on their pages. We would like to change Shai's profile mostly, change the chapters and the text. But I have tried changing the profile a few times with no luck. How can these changes be made in the correct way? Thank you so much for your help.

Question for you at one of your subpages :)

Hi, we don't know each other but I saw one of your subpages when I was looking at your history at your post at the Climate change case. I don't know if you would see my question there so here I am to let you know. If you respond to me, would you please either use the talkback template or a note to let me know on my talk page so I don't miss it? Thanks, happy editing, --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that page, liked it, and added a few bits and bobs. I hope you find the edits useful. --TS 01:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw! Thank you!!!--*Kat* (talk) 01:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 127: / Line 127: @@
 Hi, I have a large amount of changes to make on behalf of University of the People and Shai Reshef. I have tried changing the pages a few times but the changes have been rejected by you. I tried using the sandbox but I cannot succeed. I need help in editing these pages. Can you please help me with this issue?  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Taliagw|Taliagw]] ([[User talk:Taliagw|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Taliagw|contribs]]) 20:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :Yes, I think I remember this.  What sort of content changes (specifically) are you trying to make? --[[User:*Kat*|*Kat*]] ([[User talk:*Kat*#top|talk]]) 20:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
+Hi, I represent University of the people and Shai Reshef, and we need to make many changes on their pages. We would like to change Shai's profile mostly, change the chapters and the text. But I have tried changing the profile a few times with no luck. How can these changes be made in the correct way? Thank you so much for your help.
 == Question for you at one of your subpages :) ==