Jump to content

Talk:Eggdrop: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 89: Line 89:


::''"channel originated"?''<p>Notability and relevance are not issues here. It ''is'' important to the history of this software as this is the very reason ''Robey Pointer'' created it. This fact has been stated in the article since at least August 2005 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eggdrop&diff=prev&oldid=21207192] (although at that time, unsourced) and ''is not'' a recent addition to the article.<p>The [[WP:NNC]] section of the notability guideline also states: ''"The notability guidelines are only used to determine whether a topic can have its own '''separate article''' on Wikipedia and do '''not''' govern article content. The question of content coverage within a given page is governed by the principle of [[WP:WEIGHT|due weight]] and other [[:Category:Wikipedia content policy|content policies]]."'' Although I've shown above ''why'' this is historically important, the WP:NNC of the notability guideline makes it clear that your comment of ''"Why is this notable?"'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eggdrop&diff=prev&oldid=394014619] is rather moot.<p>In addition (as if the above isn't ''already'' enough), [[Special:Contributions/24.165.151.49|24.165.151.49]] is a [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppet]] of someone who rather enjoys [[WP:WIKISTALK|wikistalking]] my past edits. While I certainly ''do'' have the technical evidence to back up my claim, providing it on-wiki would also publicly out that individual. You do also realise that the above talk page section was also written almost ''two'' years ago and that no one has taken issue with any of this (after actual references were provided of course) until 24.165.151.49 showed up here? --[[User:Tothwolf|Tothwolf]] ([[User talk:Tothwolf|talk]]) 22:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
::''"channel originated"?''<p>Notability and relevance are not issues here. It ''is'' important to the history of this software as this is the very reason ''Robey Pointer'' created it. This fact has been stated in the article since at least August 2005 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eggdrop&diff=prev&oldid=21207192] (although at that time, unsourced) and ''is not'' a recent addition to the article.<p>The [[WP:NNC]] section of the notability guideline also states: ''"The notability guidelines are only used to determine whether a topic can have its own '''separate article''' on Wikipedia and do '''not''' govern article content. The question of content coverage within a given page is governed by the principle of [[WP:WEIGHT|due weight]] and other [[:Category:Wikipedia content policy|content policies]]."'' Although I've shown above ''why'' this is historically important, the WP:NNC of the notability guideline makes it clear that your comment of ''"Why is this notable?"'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eggdrop&diff=prev&oldid=394014619] is rather moot.<p>In addition (as if the above isn't ''already'' enough), [[Special:Contributions/24.165.151.49|24.165.151.49]] is a [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry|sockpuppet]] of someone who rather enjoys [[WP:WIKISTALK|wikistalking]] my past edits. While I certainly ''do'' have the technical evidence to back up my claim, providing it on-wiki would also publicly out that individual. You do also realise that the above talk page section was also written almost ''two'' years ago and that no one has taken issue with any of this (after actual references were provided of course) until 24.165.151.49 showed up here? --[[User:Tothwolf|Tothwolf]] ([[User talk:Tothwolf|talk]]) 22:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
:::stop making paranoid claims about users "stalking" you if you cannot back such claims with evidence. wikipedia is not an outlet or replacement for therapy or counseling. this is why you were arbcom sanctioned. your unsubstantiated claims against other editors ends now
:::stop making paranoid claims about users "stalking" you if you cannot back such claims with evidence. YOU HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADMONISHED BY ARBCOM FOR "allegations of misconduct against other editors without substantiating them" [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf/Proposed_decision#Tothwolf]] and the arbcom admin stated in your official admonishment and sanctioning that "Tothwolf does appear to have COI issues with Eggdrop at least, but his behavioral issues are more concerning". your unsubstantiated claims against other editors ends now.
and i agree that #gayteen is a superfluous detail.
and i agree that #gayteen is a superfluous detail.
[[User:Theserialcomma|Theserialcomma]] ([[User talk:Theserialcomma|talk]]) 01:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
[[User:Theserialcomma|Theserialcomma]] ([[User talk:Theserialcomma|talk]]) 01:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:58, 1 November 2010

WikiProject iconIRC C‑class (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject IRC, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Irony

Ironically, #gayteen on EFNet was killed (closed out, locked and nobody ever came back) by a team of eggdrops. Orbital (talk • contribs) 04:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax

Ben Dover? That has to be fake. 134.48.103.32 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How much of the history in this article can be verified? Grocer (talk • contribs) 22:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Developers

List of developers/contributors was removed? Damn I felt so proud being there, c'mon =))) Takeda 06:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but what is it?

Speaking as someone not familiar with Eggdrop or IRC: Could someone please include a jargon-free note at the beginning of this article on just what Eggdrop is/does? (Wikipedia:Explain_jargon#Subject-specific_terms). Thanks. -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

«Eggdrop is a popular IRC bot.» the page says. One can follow the See also links to IRC bot and Internet Relay Chat. So I don't really see what you expect the page to say? -- skiidoo (talk) 17:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1.6.18 version

Just updated with the 1.6.18 update --83.88.93.252 10:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not right. It's not out yet.--BarkerJr 02:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship of #gayteen in article

Mention of the EFNet channel #gayteen in the article has been censored many times by different people with various supposed reasons. I'm including additional references below that would be difficult to include as inline citations.

Search Engine Test

Editors should note that this passage easily passes the search engine test.

Google search for "eggdrop" "gayteen"

Valis

Valis was the name of Robey Pointer's #gayteen Eggdrop bot (see below).

Valis and #gayteen are mentioned in Wired 4.04: Bots Are Hot! p.5

ABOUT file

While the ABOUT file included with Eggdrop itself is probably about as authoritative as it gets, it is also possible to find reference to EFNet #gayteen in very old versions of Eggdrop itself.

Many old versions of Eggdrop are available via the Eggheads FTP server.

Notable versions

Eggdrop version 0.7d (released April 11, 1994)

From the file 'sample.config' contained in the 0.7c source archive:

# configuration file for Valis
# (eggdrop 0.7)
# username for user@host
user valis

# real name field (inconsequential, really)
realname the divine invasion

# make a log file?  what's it called?
logfile gayteen.log

# these are dynamic (ie, chan be changed and rehashed)
channel #gayteen
nick Valis
# where to store user records:
userfile gayteen.user

# who's running this damn bot?
admin Reid (reid@boss.math.uic.edu), Robey (rpointe@eng.clemson.edu)

Eggdrop version 0.9r (released December 1, 1995)

From the file 'eggdrop.doc' contained in the 0.9r source archive:

If you have questions or comments about this file, please send me email
at <robey@lightning.net>.  Thanks.

(1) ABOUT EGGDROP

    Eggdrop was created around December 1993 to help stop the incessant
    wars on #gayteen.  It spawned from another bot I had been writing  
    at the time called "Unrest".  The purpose of Unrest was to answer  
    help requests from other bots (the equivalent of eggdrop's current 
    helpbot option).  The first public release was (I think) v0.6, and 
    it's grown a lot since then.

Tothwolf (talk) 00:07, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how the specific channel where the channel originated adds anything to the article. It's lack of mention could be due to it's lack of relevance, not "censorship". IRWolfie- (talk) 18:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"channel originated"?

Notability and relevance are not issues here. It is important to the history of this software as this is the very reason Robey Pointer created it. This fact has been stated in the article since at least August 2005 [1] (although at that time, unsourced) and is not a recent addition to the article.

The WP:NNC section of the notability guideline also states: "The notability guidelines are only used to determine whether a topic can have its own separate article on Wikipedia and do not govern article content. The question of content coverage within a given page is governed by the principle of due weight and other content policies." Although I've shown above why this is historically important, the WP:NNC of the notability guideline makes it clear that your comment of "Why is this notable?" [2] is rather moot.

In addition (as if the above isn't already enough), 24.165.151.49 is a sockpuppet of someone who rather enjoys wikistalking my past edits. While I certainly do have the technical evidence to back up my claim, providing it on-wiki would also publicly out that individual. You do also realise that the above talk page section was also written almost two years ago and that no one has taken issue with any of this (after actual references were provided of course) until 24.165.151.49 showed up here? --Tothwolf (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

stop making paranoid claims about users "stalking" you if you cannot back such claims with evidence. YOU HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADMONISHED BY ARBCOM FOR "allegations of misconduct against other editors without substantiating them" [[3]] and the arbcom admin stated in your official admonishment and sanctioning that "Tothwolf does appear to have COI issues with Eggdrop at least, but his behavioral issues are more concerning". your unsubstantiated claims against other editors ends now.

and i agree that #gayteen is a superfluous detail. Theserialcomma (talk) 01:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

The references User:Theserialcomma removed [4] are perfectly acceptable and due to the way in which they are used cannot violate WP:NPOV. These references are not used as a source for the subject of the article itself, they are used to establish the fact that #tcl on freenode exists and is not a support channel for Eggdrop.

This reference [5] establishes that #tcl on freenode is indeed the official Tcl channel. And these references [6] [7] make it quite clear in no uncertain terms that the #tcl channel on freenode is not an Eggdrop support channel.

Furthermore, contrary to the edit summary User:Theserialcomma used when making the above revert, wikis are not banned or necessarily unreliable. In this case, the Tclers Wiki is one of the official documentation repositories for the Tcl developers themselves (who are well known experts in their field), as well as their IRC channel, #tcl on freenode. Many of those developers are listed in the first reference mentioned above [8] Had User:Theserialcomma actually bothered to do any fact checking, this would be quite obvious.

--Tothwolf (talk) 04:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please read WP:V. wikis can be edited by anyone, so therefore their editorial oversight is unknown, and hence questionable. sources should be used that are "based upon reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy," and wikis generally fail that. furthermore, are you sure that you should be editing/edit warring in this article? please see WP:COI and see if this might pertain to you. Theserialcomma (talk) 04:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Tclers Wiki is also regularly cited [9] [10] and referenced in books about Tcl [11] [12]
Please stop vandalizing this article.
--Tothwolf (talk) 04:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is an invalid argument here. calling me a vandal, when i am not vandalizing, is a personal attack. that is your 4th personal attack that i've witnessed in 2 days. do not continue with this behavior or you will be reported. Theserialcomma (talk) 04:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
vandalize– (v)
  1. To needlessly destroy other people's property; to commit vandalism.
vandalism– (n)
  1. Willful damage or destruction, often of shared property.
harassment– (n)
  1. Persistent attacks and criticism causing worry and distress
  2. To deliberately pester or annoy
--Tothwolf (talk) 05:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cf. WP:PS and WP:SELFPUB. The source is only being used to describe the presence of a help section and not make any interpretations that may lead into original research. The wiki constitutes as such a primary source and is hence OK, provided nothing else is given from what is described. MuZemike 06:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the wiki is not a primary source, it's a wiki. irc doesn't have primary sources, other than chat logs. considering the fact that anyone can edit the wiki, there is no way this is an acceptable resource. for all we know, the channels mentioned backed by the wiki source could be the place to go to get viruses sent to you automatically. without independent, third party sources verifying what is actually in the channel, it has no place here. especially not coming from a wiki. come on, we all know that wiki's are not a reliable source. i mean, have you visited wikipedia recently? the only thing reliable about wikipedia is when it cites reliable sources. not the wiki itself. Theserialcomma (talk) 11:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) Have to butt my uninvolved head here. The key policy is WP:V, which is a policy. The argument regarding the source, the tcl wiki, is WP:RS, which is a guideline. The material is verifiable. The particular source, the tcl wiki, is a primary source. It makes no difference that it is a wiki, it is the primary source of information (along side the group, comp.lang.tcl) for tcl. For the argument that irc doesn't have any sources, what particular sources are required? The IETF publishes several RFCs for irc. Yngvarr (t) (c) 13:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Theserialcomma said "wikis can be edited by anyone, so therefore their editorial oversight is unknown, and hence questionable.". What about a static revision link? [13] is not editable by anyone. Theserialcomma now deleted the whole support section [14]. The first support resource mentioned was Undernet #eggdrop. Why is [15] not a WP:RS? The README file in the Eggdrop software package also mentions that channel and the others. [16] shows that there are numerous #tcl channels across IRC networks, and that freenode #tcl - in the channel topic - sends eggdrop questions to another channel. thommey (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I see it, the issue is moot: as Wikipedia is not a directory, we shouldn't be listing help channels to begin with. If readers want to discover this sort of detail, they should refer to external links for the most current information. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

promotional wording

Repeated use of the product name is a sign of promotional writing; I adjusted this, and also condensed some of the content. DGG ( talk ) 23:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]