User talk:Matt Crypto: Difference between revisions
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs) →The Signpost: 8 November 2010: new section |
Matt Crypto (talk | contribs) m Reverted edits by EdwardsBot (talk) to last version by Matt Crypto |
||
Line 1,025: | Line 1,025: | ||
Hi Matt. You may be interested to know that at the Swahili wikipedia, there is currently a discussion going on about removing admins who haven't contributed in a long time (cf. http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi#Kuondoa_wakabidhi_ambao_hawakushiriki_tena_tangu_miezi_kumi_au_zaidi). You may want to consider shortening that process by requesting the removal of your admin status yourself [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions#Removal_of_access here]. Of course, you'd be even more welcome to contribute to sw:wp again. Karibu sana! --[[User:Baba Tabita|Baba Tabita]] ([[User talk:Baba Tabita|talk]]) 20:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC) |
Hi Matt. You may be interested to know that at the Swahili wikipedia, there is currently a discussion going on about removing admins who haven't contributed in a long time (cf. http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi#Kuondoa_wakabidhi_ambao_hawakushiriki_tena_tangu_miezi_kumi_au_zaidi). You may want to consider shortening that process by requesting the removal of your admin status yourself [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions#Removal_of_access here]. Of course, you'd be even more welcome to contribute to sw:wp again. Karibu sana! --[[User:Baba Tabita|Baba Tabita]] ([[User talk:Baba Tabita|talk]]) 20:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
== ''The Signpost'': 1 November 2010 == |
|||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-01}} |
|||
</div><!--Volume 6, Issue 44--> |
|||
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' · [[Wikipedia:Signpost/Single|Single-page]] · [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] · [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 04:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)</div> |
|||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0085 --> |
|||
== ''The Signpost'': 8 November 2010 == |
|||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-08}} |
|||
</div><!--Volume 6, Issue 45--> |
|||
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' · [[Wikipedia:Signpost/Single|Single-page]] · [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] · [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 16:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)</div> |
|||
<!-- EdwardsBot 0086 --> |
Revision as of 17:09, 9 November 2010
I have stamped out numerous non-GB spellings in Industrialisation per WP:ENGVAR. Did I miss any? Edison (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Featured article review of Caesar cipher
Caesar cipher has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thanks, Cumulus Clouds (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've responded to the discussion on that page. Thanks, Cumulus Clouds (talk) 06:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Discussion regarding Early computers task force
Discussion regarding Early computers task force can be found here -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
User:Maurog
Please either unblock or ask for review of this block. Calling it trolling in your edit summary doesn't automatically make it so, and I don't see that they received any warnings on their talk page. --Onorem♠Dil 18:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- It's been reviewed by another admin, and I'm perfectly happy with the block. The guy is evidently not editing in good faith, right? He's claiming he has faith in, um, a flying spaghetti monster... — Matt Crypto 19:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- And? Yeah, it's silly, but it's not blatantly offensive or anything...and while the "faith" part of his comment may have been trolling, other parts were relevant to the conversation. A warning or at least a block notice would have been appropriate. --Onorem♠Dil 19:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm quite happy with people being silly, but there's a difference between making a joke, and acting out a parody in a context where it's just disruptive and a waste of other people's time. I think it's appropriate to send a message that it's not going to be tolerated indefinitely (whether the message will get through or not is unclear, given that he's now claiming "religious persecution"...) — Matt Crypto 19:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I think a message to that effect on the user's talk page, along with a note that you would block if the behavior continued, would have done the same job. I strongly disagree with blocking without warning except in cases of blatant disruption, but I don't care enough to argue about it, and like you said, it's been reviewed by another admin now. --Onorem♠Dil 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- I'm quite happy with people being silly, but there's a difference between making a joke, and acting out a parody in a context where it's just disruptive and a waste of other people's time. I think it's appropriate to send a message that it's not going to be tolerated indefinitely (whether the message will get through or not is unclear, given that he's now claiming "religious persecution"...) — Matt Crypto 19:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- And? Yeah, it's silly, but it's not blatantly offensive or anything...and while the "faith" part of his comment may have been trolling, other parts were relevant to the conversation. A warning or at least a block notice would have been appropriate. --Onorem♠Dil 19:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for reminding me once again that Wikipedia admins think the rules are written for everyone but themselves. If I thought you people have any shame, I'd tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself. • Maurog • 23:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome. — Matt Crypto 09:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Salaam
Salam nyingi kutoka Dar es Salaam! Jamani Matt, hujambo? Nafurahia kuona umerudi tena katika Wikipedia, ingawaje umetutupa sie Waswahili! Je,basi huna hata dakika mbili - moja za kuweza kututembelea na sisi Waswahili katika Wikipedia kwa Kiswahili? Zilikuwa salam za kukutakia kheri na maisha mema!!!--Muddyb Blast Producer (talk) 15:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
A request. Zahd (talk) 04:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 14 and 21, 2008.
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 29 | 14 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
From the editor: Transparency | ||
WikiWorld: "Goregrind" | Dispatches: Interview with botmaster Rick Block | |
Features and admins | Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 30 | 21 July 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 05:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Skull of Mkwawa
Hi, Matt. I have an notice. Today, I uploaded image:Skull of Mkwawa.jpg to Commons. Because I translated Chief Mkwawa to Japanese and I'd like to use that image on jawp.
Thank you for your uploading and sorry for my broken English. Regards.--Backblow (talk) 09:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,
As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.
We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.
You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.
We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!
Addbot (talk) 07:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Unblockrequest
Dear Matt,
I'm an academic and 'real name user' who has been blocked as a 'sockpuppet' of Wikigiraffes who uses the same computer as me. I have made all the usual requests to be unblocked, plus had long email exchanges about it with SlimVirgin and Jimbo, both of whom have been 'evasive', always promising to 'look into it' ...
It really is very suspicious!
Wikigiraffes is accused of many terrible things but in fact, was blocked for posting a critique from a blog of a journalist as part of a userpage debate over whether or not that journalists's page (started by SlimVirgin) should contain any critical content.
I would like to ask you to review the vindictive block applied by SlimVirgin to my friend Wikigiraffes, and then perhaps review my one too as Wikigiraffes ' sockpuppet'.
Please email if you like to know any more. 90.62.148.67 (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC) (doc=martin=cohen)
NowCommons: Image:FEAL-round.png
Image:FEAL-round.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:FEAL InfoBox Diagram.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:FEAL InfoBox Diagram.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
- Image:RC2-mix.png is now available as Commons:Image:RC2 InfoBox Diagram.png. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
- File:M-209.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Hagelin M-209.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 37 | 15 September 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Reward for African country editing
Hi, I was wondering as a part of the reward board offering if you could please copyedit Burundi. I am trying to get this article to GA status. Any extra advice will help. Thanks. miranda 06:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Virgil Exner
Hi, as a previous contributor, pls check out my enquiry at Talk:Virgil Exner#Design work. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 05:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Domestic discipline
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Ambox_warning_pn.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_pn.svg.png)
I have nominated Domestic discipline, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domestic discipline. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. VG ☎ 01:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Enigma links
Hi Matt,
It's been a while, everything ok? I recently visited the Enigma page and saw that many of the External links were removed. Not only these of my (non-commercial non-advertising non-selling) website , but alse great links to pages as Paul Reuver's RISC Enigma sims, or Frode Weieruds pages on breaking Wehrmacht Ciphers and the CSG simulators. They have replaced the links with some external list, i don't know what it is. It seems that they have 'trown away the baby with the water' as they say in our region. Of course, there were some commercial links or links to really bad software, but did all have to go???
Could you visit the Enigma discussion page (topic adding/removing links) Apparently a guy called Chris Cunningham has removed the links and replaced them by some sort of list. Like to get your opinion at the discussion page. Regards, Dirk Rijmenants Dirk (talk) 00:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Matt, never mind, links can be changed and added. Has been resolved. Regards,Dirk (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Whitecross
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/74/Ambox_warning_yellow.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_yellow.svg.png)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Whitecross, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bongomatic 13:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Reference Desk cypher question
This ref desk question Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#Which Cypher is This? seems particularly suited to your interests and capabilities. Is there any hope for a solution? The sample text seems too short, unless "Death" were a setting for some known cypher. Thanks. Edison (talk) 05:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Death to crypto navboxes!
I'd be interested in your opinion on my proposal to remove all crypto navboxes, here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cryptography#Proposal: remove all crypto navboxes -- ciphergoth (talk) 14:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:53, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 16:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Cast-128 Image
Hello,
i am writing about an image you created for the article about the Cast-128 crypto algorithm. As i studied the specific algorithm, i realized that there is a slight difference between the image and the Request For Comments 2144 where the algorithm is presented. Copying form the RFC:
Type 1: I = ((Kmi + D) <<< Kri) f = ((S1[Ia] ^ S2[Ib]) - S3[Ic]) + S4[Id]
Type 2: I = ((Kmi ^ D) <<< Kri) f = ((S1[Ia] - S2[Ib]) + S3[Ic]) ^ S4[Id]
Type 3: I = ((Kmi - D) <<< Kri) f = ((S1[Ia] + S2[Ib]) ^ S3[Ic]) - S4[Id]
The RFC also states:
"CAST-128 uses a pair of subkeys per round: a 32-bit quantity Km is used as a "masking" key and a 5-bit quantity Kr is used as a "rotation" key."
So i believe that the two sub-keys (Kmi and Kri) should be switched in place in the image. I believe that now the image depicts the opposite argument.
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Enigma machine FAR
I have nominated Enigma machine for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt (talk) 07:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
James Crosby
You correctly removed the word disgraced from this BLP. Are you happy about the comment in the talk page? Baron Myners is another such. Kittybrewster ☎ 13:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Clarification on a block
You blocked User talk:Garygateaux for abusing mutliple accounts, but failed to name those accounts which are his multiples. These people always request an unblock and always profess their innocence, and it would be easier if you linked to the obvious evidence which I am sure exists to tie him to some other accounts. Please advise so that I can decline his latest unblock request. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
- In all probability User:Babylon93 (see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Babylon93). — Matt Crypto 17:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Request that you unblock User:Garygateaux on the basis of his last edit. Kittybrewster ☎ 11:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
- News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
- WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Fravia
Hello, could you please unprotect the article Fravia so that a rewrite can be done? I know it was given an AfD which resulted in a redirect, but the reason for that AfD was that the article was poorly written, which can be solved by a rewrite. Thanks! Ooseaway (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I came here for the same reason, but Ooseaway has been quicker than me. Zorbid (talk) 15:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, it's already been unprotected by User:Evercat. — Matt Crypto 16:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
It was rightfully redirected after AfD. Now the same IPs and disruptive users are back and putting garbage into the article. What am I supposed to do? Enigmamsg 00:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Source of disruption. Currently, the article contains a giant image, two out of five references being fravia.com and "that friend was me" and trash such as
"Over the many years of his internet presence, Fravia was able to build a notable community of really smart people. He guided them, provided information, collected their works. He was always available for help and critical comments.
A countless number of brilliant people have been involved over the years attracted by the great wealth of knowledge that was available on the fravia website. In the beginning, these people were mostly interested in software reversing and in software protection, but gradually he was able to expand the context to critical thinking, reality cracking and knowledge management.
Only a very small part of the people who was accessing his pages actively contributed to the website. Nevertheless, many were the contributions.(some info about contributors countries and web site statistics could fit nicely here. can you provide them DQ?)"
- This does not belong on Wikipedia and there's an AfD to back that up. The current version is quite possibly worse than the version that existed when it was originally sent to AfD in the first place. Enigmamsg 00:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- it wasn't rightfully redirected; something like 4 ppl voted on that issue. It never occured to me that some one would delete the page, if it had I would have visited more often and explained the importance of the page and also done touch up work to make it more acceptable.
- The source of the "disruption" is here, Fravia recently passed away; a lot of people are now coming to WP to read about his life in a single page only to find that there isn't any coverage of him. The reason WP members are having such a great difficulty in fixing the page is that they are new to the WP and unaccustomed to the way of things here, they are filled with emotion and POV given the fact that a very great man has died recently, and Fravia was a member of a scene that didn't get any media coverage due to misc. controvercies and the personal nature of the reversing scene. I can assure you, searchlores.org (Fravia.com) ironically, is one of the most credible places to find information on the topic of advanced internet searching and enlightened software concepts. If you know of a site with greater credibility in the field, PLZ make mention of this in the discussion section so we can contact them and request that they do a story on the man's life. You, I have to say, are not doing a very job of criticising the members of this site frequenting that page you're in contest with and it is exacerbating matters. This will not go away with mindless blanking of the page, it's just going to frustrate members and result in a waste of everyone's time.Xetxo (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies. Perhaps you are not aware of what AfDs are. Also, please assume good faith. If he's a "very great man", then there should be no trouble finding reliable sources discussing him. If he didn't get coverage, then perhaps he is not notable by Wikipedia's definition of the term. As for the site's credibility, I don't know or care. I was simply linking to where the troublesome edits originated from. Enigmamsg 05:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- The source of the "disruption" is here, Fravia recently passed away; a lot of people are now coming to WP to read about his life in a single page only to find that there isn't any coverage of him. The reason WP members are having such a great difficulty in fixing the page is that they are new to the WP and unaccustomed to the way of things here, they are filled with emotion and POV given the fact that a very great man has died recently, and Fravia was a member of a scene that didn't get any media coverage due to misc. controvercies and the personal nature of the reversing scene. I can assure you, searchlores.org (Fravia.com) ironically, is one of the most credible places to find information on the topic of advanced internet searching and enlightened software concepts. If you know of a site with greater credibility in the field, PLZ make mention of this in the discussion section so we can contact them and request that they do a story on the man's life. You, I have to say, are not doing a very job of criticising the members of this site frequenting that page you're in contest with and it is exacerbating matters. This will not go away with mindless blanking of the page, it's just going to frustrate members and result in a waste of everyone's time.Xetxo (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- News and notes: Jackson's death, new data center, more
- Wikipedia in the news: Google News Support, Wired editor plagiarizes Wikipedia, Rohde's kidnapping, Michael Jackson
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- News and notes: Commons grant, license change, new chapters, usability and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia and kidnapping, new comedy series
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Food and Drink
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- From the editor: Welcome to the build-your-own edition of the Signpost
- Board elections: Board of Trustees elections draw 18 candidates for 3 seats
- Wiki-Conference: Wikimedians and others gather for Wiki-Conference New York
- Wikipedia Academy: Volunteers lead Wikipedia Academy at National Institutes of Health
- News and notes: Things that happened in the Wikimedia world
- Wikipedia in the news: Assorted news coverage of Wikipedia
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Oregon
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
- News and notes: WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more
- Wikipedia in the news: Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
You may want to be aware of Talk:Ubuntu#RFC: Where should the redirect point?. Better and quantified arguments are being made in support of the philosophy. Yworo (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I suggest you have a *pint* for him. Died Friday, according to the Bletchley Park twitter feed. (How's that for pushing the definition of "reliable source".) - David Gerard (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edit comment does not really address the issue of why my edit is not acceptable in an article predominantly sourced from two websites of equal (or perhaps less) verifiability than my source. I'm not for a minute suggesting that the website in question is in the same league as print media, but it is certainly in the same league as www.greymansland.com or www.andmcnab.co.uk. What's the story? 121.219.155.85 (talk) 11:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- I have no comment on those other two websites, but the claim is about the identity of a living person for whom the revelation of his identity may (nor may not) have relevance to his personal security. The sources used, therefore, have to be beyond reproach. — Matt Crypto 12:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
www.andymcnab.co.uk is McNabs official (and therefor approved by author) website. Greymansland is a fansite with no links to McNab, hence not valid when it comes verifiability. Therealistbravotwozero website was created by an enthusiastic wiki contributor, who saw valid verifiability fail on wiki (hence his information was removed), so then created a website to make the same information verifiable. That would be the same as saying "Hitler was born as a woman" and then create a website saying that exact same thing and then say it must be real because it is on my website. I think not. So in my opinion: McNab's official website is a reliable source, Greymansland and The realist are not. 206.122.102.52 (talk) 12:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- As the anon says. See also Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Using_the_subject_as_a_self-published_source and WP:SELFPUB. — Matt Crypto 12:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- right, that is a much shorter way of saying what I meant to say ;-) 206.122.102.52 (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Template:WRCryptoSurvey has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Data encryption standard FAR
Hi Matt I have nominated Data Encryption Standard for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Kiswahili Wikipedia Challenge
Come check out what's happening on the swahili wiki... we have 800 registrants for a winter article-writing contest! They need help registering accounts, though. Also, Mr Accountable is doing some amazing things with topic-specific scripted article creation. Warmly, +sj+ 01:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009
- Election report: ArbCom election begins December 1, using SecurePoll
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009
- From the editors: 250th issue of the Signpost
- Editorial: A digital restoration
- Election report: ArbCom election in full swing
- Interview: Interview with David G. Post
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Falsification of sources
Please do not introduce material into articles that misrepresents cited sources, as you did with Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. The issue you raised has been discussed at length on the talk page. If you continue to disrupt the article you may find yourself being blocked. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Edit Warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Hipocrite (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009
- Election report: Voting closes in the Arbitration Committee Elections
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009
- Election report: ArbCom election result announced
- News and notes: Fundraiser update, milestones and more
- In the news: Accusation of bias, misreported death, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009
- News and notes: Flagged revisions petitions, image donations, brief news
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Matt Crypto! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 699 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Malcolm J. Williamson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010
- News and notes: Fundraiser ends, content contests, image donation, and more
- In the news: Financial Times, death rumors, Google maps and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010
- From the editor: Call for writers
- 2009 in review: 2009 in Review
- Books: New Book namespace created
- News and notes: Wikimania 2011, Flaggedrevs, Global sysops and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010
- News and notes: Statistics, disasters, Wikipedia's birthday and more
- In the news: Wikipedia on the road, and more
- WikiProject report: Where are they now?
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010
- BLP madness: BLP deletions cause uproar
- Births and deaths: Wikipedia biographies in the 20th century
- News and notes: Biographies galore, Wikinews competition, and more
- In the news: Wikipedia the disruptor?
- WikiProject report: Writers wanted! The Wikiproject Novels interviews
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010
- From the editor: Writers wanted to cover strategy, public policy
- Strategic planning: The challenges of strategic planning in a volunteer community
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Dinosaurs
- Sister projects: Sister project roundup
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Problems with Category Definitions and Wikipedia Admins' move to delete
Hi Matt
I'm in the process of rewriting and extending the Dorabella Cipher article to include a deeper discussion of the cipher and related symbols (such as the probable visual mnemonics or "hairy footballs" that appear on the same page of the exercise book as the full symbol set and a mapping to a reduced alphabet) and the Liszt fragment. I'm also trying to address concerns about the article's lack of encyclopedic tone.
This work is being undertaken with the support of the director of the Eric Sams Study Centre in Italy (www.ericsams.org) since some of Eric's as yet unpublished work contains materials that are relevant.
Since this is going to be a slow process I have set up a sandbox under my user page and copied the current article there, and bit by bit I'm working on it (as and when I can). Once it's finished I'll replace the existing article wholesale.
To that end I created and uploaded to Wikimedia some stylized graphics of both the visual mnemonics and a table of one mapping of the cipher (as depicted by Elgar's own exercise book page) and attempted to categorize them, with some advice from the Help desk there.
I'm tripping over a problem with a couple of Wikipedia admins who don't know the cipher and who don't seem to be able to understand some of the issues (or rather, I don't seem to be able to find an explanation that works for them). The current discussion is here: the discussion page
I'm trying to replicate in Wikipedia the category hierarchy that I created in Wikimedia, for consistency.
I don't know whether you would feel disposed to support keeping the category Cipher-Related Symbols to cover the visual mnemonics (the hairy footballs that are not cipher symbols per se but are related to the cipher). I'd be grateful for your thoughts.
The category hierarchy is: History of cryptography | Uncracked codes and ciphers | Dorabella Cipher | Cipher-Related Symbols. The first three categories already exist on Wikipedia.
My argument is that the mnemonics belong in the Cipher-Related Symbols category, not the Dorabella Cipher category, since they are not part of the cipher but are related to it.
Kind regards, AncientBrit (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
- News and notes: Commons at 6 million, BLP taskforce, milestones and more
- In the news: Robson Revisions, Rumble in the Knesset, and more
- Dispatches: Fewer reviewers in 2009
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Olympics
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010
- News and notes: New Georgia Encyclopedia, BLPs, Ombudsmen, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Singapore
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
CfD nomination of Category:GCHQ
I have nominated Category:GCHQ (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010
- In the news: Macmillan's Wiki-textbooks and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Mammals
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Your DES image
I find your image File:Data Encryption Standard InfoBox Diagram.png a little bit confusing. At first sight it looks that "Half block (32 bits)" and "Subkey (48 bit)" are XOR-ed together. The image doesn't say anything about "E". Maybe it is better to write "Expansion (48 Bits)". This is IMHO more clear. What do you think about? --qbi (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010
- Sister projects: A handful of happenings
- WikiProject report: The WikiProject Bulletin: news roundup and WikiProject Chicago feature
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010
- News and notes: New board member, rights elections, April 1st activities, videos
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Baseball and news roundup
- Features and admins: This week in approvals
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Thanks re: Enigma (machine) comment
Thanks, Matt for your remarks. I am, actually British and have two good friends who worked on the Ferranti Mark 1. I am concerned that there is accuracy and balance in articles about Enigma, its decryption, Alan Turing and early computers. --TedColes (talk) 10:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
- Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia
- News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news
- In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
File copyright problem with File:Tunny-wheels.jpg
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thank you for uploading File:Tunny-wheels.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
File source problem with File:CRAY.jpg
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thank you for uploading File:CRAY.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Tunny-wheels.jpg
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Tunny-wheels.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 02:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010
- UK COI edits: British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
- News and notes: Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative
- Discussion report: Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Apple Inc.
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010
- News and notes: Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: Up close with WikiProject Animals
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010
- News and notes: New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news
- In the news: Wikipedia leads in customer satisfaction, Google Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade
- WikiProject report: These Are the Voyages of WikiProject Star Trek
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Discussion report: Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010
- News and notes: Canadian political edits, Swedish royal wedding, Italian "right of reply" bill, Chapter reports
- In the news: Gardner and Sanger on why people edit Wikipedia, Fancy and frugal reading devices, Medical article assessed
- WikiProject report: Always Expanding: WikiProject Images and Media
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010
- News and notes: FBI requests takedown of seal, Public Policy advisors and ambassadors, Cary Bass leaving, new Research Committee
- In the news: Wikinews interviews Umberto Eco, and more
- Sister projects: Strategic Planning update
- WikiProject report: Chocks away for WikiProject Aviation
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 16 August 2010
- WikiProject report: A Pit Stop with WikiProject NASCAR
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom releases names of CU/OS applicants after delay
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Signpost: 23 August 2010
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Cryptozoology
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision of climate change case posted
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
File source problem with File:Ggg.png
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thank you for uploading File:Ggg.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Lorenz SZ42 photos
Matt, I am updating the Lorenz cipher article and wonder whether you have a version of your Wikimedia Commons photo 'SZ42-6-wheels.jpg' that could be used to illustrate how the pins (cams) on the wheels work. When I look at your photo full-screen, I can see how the pins work on the wheels nearest to the camera. If you have a higher resolution version of this photo, would it be possible to 'zoom in' on the two wheels nearest but two to the camera (2 and 3) at the point where the light is reflecting, and put the resultant picture on Wikimedia Commons? --TedColes (talk) 15:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- I think the current is at the original resolution, I'm afraid -- sorry! — Matt Crypto 16:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 September 2010
- From the editor: New ways to read and share the Signpost
- News and notes: Dutch National Archives donation, French photo raid, brief notes
- In the news: Rush Limbaugh falls for Wikipedia hoax, Public Policy Initiative, Nature cites Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: All Aboard WikiProject Trains
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Dispatches: Tools, part 2: Internal links and page histories
- Arbitration report: Discretionary sanctions clarification and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
sw:wp
Hi Matt. You may be interested to know that at the Swahili wikipedia, there is currently a discussion going on about removing admins who haven't contributed in a long time (cf. http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wakabidhi#Kuondoa_wakabidhi_ambao_hawakushiriki_tena_tangu_miezi_kumi_au_zaidi). You may want to consider shortening that process by requesting the removal of your admin status yourself here. Of course, you'd be even more welcome to contribute to sw:wp again. Karibu sana! --Baba Tabita (talk) 20:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)