User talk:Alvestrand

feel free to add topics.....

Older talk:

User talk:Alvestrand/Archive1

Mergenames Dups?

List of people by name: Tra-Tre (but oddly enough, seemingly not List of people by name: Trf-Trz) has an unusual number of apparently identical entries. Could this be a mergenames artifact? I'm ignoring them for now, which may slightly ease your investigation.
--Jerzy•t 19:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a mergenames artifact. I was fighting a bug around there, and thought I'd managed to not insert any bad ones, but apparently not. I'll go clean them. --Alvestrand 19:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot edits

Your right that it's not worth editing these pieces of text, and in fact they should be avoided, like quotes, template names, image names URLs etc.. The difficulty in doing this is one of the reasons that there are not more bot edits. However I am working on code to avoid these edits, and I believe others may be too, so this should be a thing of the past in due course. Rich Farmbrough 21:16 25 June 2006 (GMT).

Benjamin Chew Tilghman

Hi, I'm fairly certain I got a lot of material from the wheelabratorgroup.com web site but I see that there is much less about Benjamin now than there was. Google turns up a long article, '1993055 A Tribute to Benjamin Chew Tilghman' which I don't remember seeing before which I guess could add a lot to the article.--Rjstott 03:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The State of the Art

You mentioned back in Jan that you were planning to read this. Have you, yet? My motive is that if you have I thought you could review The State of the Art and see if you want to add anything. --Guinnog 16:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - haven't even sent the order yet... it doesn't appear to be on the shelves in most shops... --Alvestrand 16:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphans

Well, Special:Lonelypages only lists 1,000 pages at a time and I don't think that's going to change. So to get new articles to tag on the next refresh, I list them temporarilly on my user subpage... this technically de-orphans them, but realistically they are still orphans until actual articles link to them. It's kind of a crude method, but it works... eventually special:lonelypages should just list under 1,000 orphans at a time (less than 1,000 seem to be created per 3-4 day period, which is how often the page refreshes). If I can tag all articles orphaned in the last 3-4 days,the creators/recent editors will be more likely to see the tag and create links. If it's added 90 days later (which is common, given the state of the backlog) the creator will probably never see it.

Anyway, I hope that makes sense. My hope is to eventually move the list out of my userpage to the project space, and also to have the bot automatically remove the template (and thus, the listing) when any article has incoming links from other articles. --W.marsh 20:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, actually this answers a question I'd been wondering since I started doing this... "Where are all the dab pages going?" (from special:lonelypages) I guess I know now. Did you know that Wikipedia:Links to disambiguating pages exists? That might be a better place to create links. --W.marsh 20:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer! I'll move my collection to the common list - pooling resources is a good Wikipedia tradition! --Alvestrand 20:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little something for you

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		This well earned barnstar was brought to Alvestrand today by the letter "T". Thank you for all your hard work! — Catherine\^talk 20:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Alvestrand 01:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ISO 639-3

... good news :-) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki

A Transwiki is a transfer of an article from/to Wikipedia from an allied wiki (say Wiktionary, or WikiBooks, as is the case here). The article was deemed inappropriate for the source wiki and sent here in the "Transwiki" pseudo-namespace. Articles that appear this way are supposed to be either merged into existing articles, or wikified into a Wikipedia type article and renamed to a proper name. Or deleted if we find that it is not worth keeping.

Look at the

template:dict - Transwiki to Wiktionary from Wikipedia
template:move to wikibooks - transwiki to Wikibooks (this is the wiki where the article prodded came from)
template:move to wikisource

etc.

- 132.205.45.148 20:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IDEA licensing information?

In response to your message on my talk page:

hi, since you added info on licensing of IDEA to the Pretty Good Privacy article, could you add it to the International Data Encryption Algorithm article too?

Also I'd like to see more details & references - last I heard, it was licensed freely for non-commercial use, which means that I can use it at home, but not at work..... if that's changed, it would be nice to know! --Alvestrand 14:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I have no idea where I recalled the fact that IDEA was freely licensed. A search on Google came up with [1][2], so I guess I was wrong after all. Sorry for letting my bad memory compromise Wikipedia, I'll revert the claim now and hope this won't happen again. :) -- intgr 18:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American

I noticed that you recently added a link to American here. American is a disambiguation page as the phrase has many uses including a person from the Americas or the United States. In the future, could you link the term to one of the articles listed on the American disambiguation term, that would be great. As an example, if you're linking to something related to the United States, you would input [[United States|American]]. Thanks! --Bobblehead 07:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to remember. (only exception: when I'm not sure what the original author meant, I'll leave it pointing to the disambig.... but I think this one was just laziness). thanks for the reminder! --Alvestrand 07:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC) (not an American of any sort)[reply]

Orphan T Project

Hi AlvestrAND, how cool I just noticed where you live totally nice! NO problem helping you finish the orphan T list,when I saw you handling 400 you seemed pretty brave so I thought lets get the batch off the list once and for all.... I don't know about you, but I have to take lots of breaks and only do 10 at a time. Best regards from California Goldenrowley 04:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Open Unix

It's partly a dicdef, partly a stub, and partly a disambig. I think any could be successfully argued. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Twin Zygosity

You proposed this for deletion. Would it be better for you to merge with Zygote and turn this into a redirect to Zygote? If not, I'm happy to delete.--Runcorn 20:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A quick scan turned up no information not present in other place, and it was linkless. But if you like a redirect better, feel free. --Alvestrand 21:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: limit

Er, if any have no incoming links from articles and are still tagged, feel free to remove the tag as they're not really orphaned anymore. There are apparently about 50,000 orphan articles on WP, the bot has tagged (almost) all of them finally, it was recently doing some catchup work. Sorry it tagged that one article... you can remove the tag from it. --W.marsh 15:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well 2 links is better, yes. The bot is working from a cache so there are some mistakes. --W.marsh 15:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Internet Fix

Thank you.

The invincibles

The Ashes is also used of rugby league though the cricket usage is older and far better known. The invicibles was a rugby league team. The word 'team' needs inserting, rugby league is the name of a sport.GordyB 16:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The integrity magazine

I think you should leave a notice for the one who added the copyrighted material, in this case User:Yolodo, so he or she can fix the issue. --Pizzahut2 22:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Junglies / User:Ewan4me. --Pizzahut2 22:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I blame my own laziness. In the case of data entered by an IP address or a one-shot userid, I don't think there's much point, though. --Alvestrand 22:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes maybe you're right, however I checked the instructions and it says you should notify the "uploading editor" before you add the copyvio tag. Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Instructions: "After notifying the uploading editor, add {{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}" --Pizzahut2 22:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it doesn't specifically mention this in the case "if all revisions have copyright problems", so whatever you think is better. :) --Pizzahut2 22:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It says "Add the Maintenance use only text at the bottom of the now-blanked article to the talk page of the contributor of the copyrighted material" - the text referred to is a "subst:Nothanks" template, so I guess the instructions are clear enough. My laziness.

The reason I've come across a fair number of these recently is that I'm working my way through part of Wikipedia:Dead-end pages/L-Z - pages with no outgoing wikilinks are in many cases cut/paste jobs from other websites, it seems. --Alvestrand 00:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For an example of the kind of user that it doesn't seem to be much point in warning, see [3]. But I've done it anyway. --Alvestrand 21:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan

Yes, you're right, but I am hoping (eventually) to make "orphan" the main template and "linkless" the redirect, two main reasons: people often think "linkless" means it has no links in the article, and the categories are called "orphaned articles". What do you think? Rich Farmbrough, 20:14 9 December 2006 (GMT).

Would be nice to be consistent. Where should the debate be held? --Alvestrand 21:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Template talk:Linkless is the obvious place, some discussion already. You are now 1968th with 5965 edits (as at 30th Nov.) Rich Farmbrough, 21:10 9 December 2006 (GMT).

Dave Holland (drummer)

In all honesty, describing Scott Travis' drumming as 'crisp' and so on while dismissing Holland as someone with a 'simpler' style seems quite opinionated to me. The truth is that Holland's always been exactly what I put down originally, a groove-oriented player who aimed for the feel, never allowing the drum track to overshade the song itself. I would rather appreciate if you could find a better suited word instead of that bland 'simple' (and if you have ever heard Holland outside of The Priest, you would have known that actually, he could be, and quite often was, anything but simplistic...).

All in all, I can understand that we're viewing the situation from two totally different angles: me an old-school hard rock connoisseur, you most probably a contemporary metal aficionado. I could have very well pointed out that to my taste, Scottt Travis' rather mechanical drumming suffers from a serious lack of feeling and taste, but I somehow tried to stay true to the neutral POV. I wish you would at least keep the neutral POV policy of Wikipedia in mind while doing your subsequent edits on similar issues.

Thank you for your attention, Max Dagger 23:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note - all I did to the Dave Holland (drummer) article was to insert a link to The Flying Machine (UK band), as part of cleaning up that article. For the actual content of the article, I suggest that you Be Bold and fix it up. The article is not in an encyclopedic tone in my opinion; if I ask myself "can I verify the facts from the references listed", I think I'm likely to fail. Check out WP:V. --Alvestrand 05:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldigung Sie bitte, then - I guess I must have clicked on the wrong version of the article which showed your username as the one responsible for the 'diehard metalhead'-style edits. You're correct about the rather superfluous nature of the reference links, I should invest more work into them (even if I know that no one but myself probably finds this article of any importance). Thanks, --Max Dagger 01:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Updating WP:DEP

I have at my disposal the means to update WP:DEP with a dump dated November 30 2006. The downside of this is that it is huge, and slightly out of date and thus full of redlinks. Would you prefer I refreshed it now, or waited until L-Z is finished? I'm asking you since you seem to be a frequent contributer to the dead-end pages work, and I want to get some opinions before I just go ahead and add thousands of more entries. Thank you. Salad Days 12:25, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

T'skrang

I split of that article from Earthdawn before I saw in edit history you merged it per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). I would like to disagree and insist T'skrangs are notable enough to deserve their own article - they are a major fictional species in the Earthdawn setting, which contains dozens of role-playing books and several normal books.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 18:08, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you go edit the "Earthdawn" article then - if the article made it plain that multiple pieces of fiction set in this universe existed, I'd not be as opposed to it - but as the article is now written, it sounds like a single game only - and there are no references in either article speaking to someone beside Earthdawn's publishers and players thinking that the universe is notable - that would be a requirement for WP:NOT, in my opinion. --Alvestrand 21:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave me a msg if you reply to me on your userpage, I rarely check them as they don't generate a 'new message' note for me. Replied on article's talk page, and check external links (poor's man references) if in doubt.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 02:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, oops! Salad Days 04:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TOMA

Please check the talk page for TOMA article and delete "notability" tag if safisfied. mixer 09:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References need to go on the article page, not the talk page.... --Alvestrand 10:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Notability (local churches and other religious congregations)

You misunderstood my point. Please see the comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (local churches and other religious congregations).--JEF 22:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

American TESOL Institute

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article American TESOL Institute, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.

This is the standard courtesy notice for PROD deletions. I know you had struggled to keep this neutral. --A. B. ^(talk) 14:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About time. I've grown less tolerant of unsourced articles as time has gone by. Thanks! --Alvestrand 15:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add a Template:prod2 tag on it. Also, I raised the general issue of spambait with TESOL articles at:

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Teaching English as a second language -- spambait articles

--A. B. ^(talk) 15:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: American TESOL Institute

An article that you have been involved in editing, American TESOL Institute, has been listed by me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American TESOL Institute. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --A. B. ^(talk) 02:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC) --A. B. ^(talk) 02:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Courtney Fraser

Please don't prod nonsense articles like what you did with Thomas Courtney Fraser. Place a WP:CSD tag instead so it can be deleted quicker. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 01:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - will try to add those to my tag repertoire. --Alvestrand 12:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting TheYack.com

Hello,

I'm wondering why you deleted TheYack.com from Wikipedia. I went over the criteria for deletion, and it doesn't meet them. Yes, it's new, but it also has merit. It's the first social networking site on the Internet exclusively for everything literary. It has been covered by Publisher's Weekly, the book industry standard. And it is growing at a rate that compares with older sites. So I think it deserves inclusion.