User talk:Xiner

If you're ever unhappy about something I've done, or haven't done, or how, or why -- please tell me directly. Let me be the first to know...not the last. - WP:APBB
I have stopped accepting new adoptions. My ability to improve articles while assisting each of my adoptees to the best of my abilities would suffer otherwise.
I prefer two-way conversations. Occasionally, I'll respond on my own page for context.
I check my mail at least once daily, and will respond on your user page.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

Query?

Hello Xiner. How are you? Anyways... Do sysops have the power to merge articles? Respond on my page. Thanks in advance. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer 23:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User page update

Hello, Xiner. I've done all that you've said...
I added some content to my user page. Is there anything that I should add? (Or remove...) --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 02:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try doing that once I get my mainspace and Wikipedia edits a little higher. Thanks for the copyedit offer. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 02:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be simply AMAZING! IS that legal? (according to Wikipedia rules, of course...) --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 02:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Thanks for all of your help, Xiner. See ya around. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 02:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Yesterday you said that if you deleted my user page's history, my edit count would drop. So if one was doing new page patrol and posting deletion messages on pages that were eventually deleted, would his or her edit count not show those edits? Sorry if this message is confusing, it's kinda hard to word... --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:03, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Here's another question... :) On the edit counter thingy, there's something that says "number of unique pages". I'm fairly certain that I haven't created over 1000 pages though... --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, all right. That doesn't seem to make much sense to me though, as the "unique" part would imply that the pages were created by the user him/herself. Whatever, though. Thanks, Xiner. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question about image

I uploaded an image I made using a common picture of Uncle Sam with my own text. Is this okay? here --Theunicyclegirl 20:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Thanks! I'm going to use the image to make a template for recruiting people who edit without accounts (IP editors.) --Theunicyclegirl 20:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm basing my template on that. Only with a cool image. :D --Theunicyclegirl 20:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I get the text to wrap around the image? The template is here. --Theunicyclegirl 20:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done with userpage

Hello. I think that my userpage is "stable", so do you think that you could do one last copyedit aNd then do that nifty deletion thing? Please don't if you're in the middle of something though. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 21:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Do you think that you could also do it to my main user page? I created that other user page to revert vandalism easier, but most of my user edits are on my main page (User:Cremepuff222). Who's that IP that copyeditted my page? --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 22:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or should I get rid of that template and just place everything on my user page? --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 22:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that took so long, I had some border problems, but I fixed it. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 22:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has. Thanks very much! (Sorry I took so long to respond, I had to eat...) --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 23:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Week in the Woods

Hi there. Could you explain the deletion of this article? For one, it wasn't an A7 anyway - books aren't qualified. Secondly, the "importance" is most certainly asserted - the author alone makes it notable. Please undelete. Thanks! --badlydrawnjeff talk 00:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's at DRV. The salting seems entirely unnecessary, BTW, especially since the third deletion was entirely improper. --badlydrawnjeff talk 00:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your closure of Category:Wikipedians who own cockroaches

Hello Xiner. You closed this UCFD as a delete. I only came to know the fate of this category when you replaced it on my user page. I have to say that I strongly disagree with your decision, as: 1) the outcome was a clear lack of consensus; 2) I find it rather unorthodox that you, having participated in the discussion, later decided to close it according to your position "delete" (even though, and I find this quite odd, you said then that it was going to be kept). I intend to take this one to WP:DRV, but before I would appreciate if you could comment on my point of view regarding this situation. Thank you. Best regards, Húsönd 01:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for undeleting the category and relisting the discussion, I really appreciate your attitude. :-) I didn't know that WP:UCFD was so understaffed. Maybe I'll give you guys a hand every now and then. Best regards, Húsönd 02:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I just rolled back your changes to my user page and Wishkres', in order to restore our names on the undeleted category. Regards, Húsönd 02:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will. I really need to diversify my WP:XFD participation. Regards, Húsönd 02:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletions

Can you please review the WP:CSD and make it clear whcih criteria you are applying when speedy deleting. You seem to use a generic does not assert the importance or significance of the subject as your reason. Please note that this is not a general ground for deletion outside of the explicit grounds of A7.--Doc^g 02:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blocking

Hi- I don't understand something - this IP vandal was reported earlier here: [1] It appears that this user was supposed to have been blocked (by you, I think), but there's no indication on the user's talk page. I'm not clear on how these bots work, so thought I should ask you directly. Doesn't a note go on the blocked user's talk page when a block is initiated? thanks Tvoz | talk 09:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok- that makes sense. Sorry for posting the request twice, in that case. Tvoz | talk 17:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But just thinking about this a little more - I'm not on the vandal patrol, but I do generally call people out on vandalism when I revert it, and I report it to AIV when appropriate, but I don't look into logs or history to see if they've been reported before, so wouldn't it be a good idea for a notice to be automatically put on the blocked person's page - maybe by the bot? - so AIV doesn't get multiple reports? Not a big deal in any case, just wondering. (POint being that sometimes you come across someone's vandalism that was done prior to their being reported by someone else.) Just thought I'd mention that. Cheers Tvoz | talk 18:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Actors and Filmmakers

Hey see my proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Actor and Filmmakers and the main WP Film and Biography talk page. Know anybody who is interested? Actors and all film people articles need a body on wikipedia to upkeep them asthey need more focus -it would be a part of Biogrpahy and Film. If you are interested or know somebody who would be, please let them know and whether you think it is a good progession for the project or not. Please leave your views at the council or biogrpahy main talk page. THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THanks. This would become a major project existing between Films and Biographies. There are so many neglected articles that a project that focuses on this is needed to the extreme!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 15:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It amazes me that projects like WikiProject Lego or whatver eixts but not this!!!!! People in Entertainment sounds a great idea but wouldn't it be too large in scope? I was thinking even world Cinema biogrpahies are huge in their own right let alone television etc!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 15:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms and attacks

There's a big difference between criticizing someone by way of pointing out their inconsistencies and displayed behaviour, and attacking them outright; Hong always soft-pedals attacks on those whose view he opposes, so he can go the passive-aggressive route and complain about being attacked; in this case he's entirely disingenuous about complaints about "weasel words" and so on, but you'd have to be familiar with the discussion and the content/context to appreciate by how much. My criticisms of him are valid criticisms; if Wikipedia can't deal with that in any other way than going "oooh, no personal attacks" then I think the definition of personal attack is on the one hand a little too harsh, and on the other not stringent enough to catch passive-aggressive in the act.Skookum1 21:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Dr. Doug Powell into Food Safety Network

I am sending you this message because you edited Dr. Doug Powell. I added a merge template to Dr. Doug Powell proposing that it be merged into Food Safety Network. It appears that the FSN is much more likely to be considered notable than its director. Some of the info about Dr. Powell is already in the FSN article; perhaps a bit more could be added, then delete the article on Dr. Powell. If you wish to comment, please go to Talk:Food Safety Network. Please do not delete the merge templates until there is adequate time to discuss, generally about four weeks unless there appears to be significant agreement earlier. For details about the merging process, see Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages. Thanks. Ward3001 23:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your efforts. My last comment on the noticeboard was basically a clarification that it was not about a content dispute, because Skookum's comment was focused on that instead of the personal attacks. Anyway, I won't reply anymore as long as he does not attack me again. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 23:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think

I'm thinking of creating a User account called User:Anti Vandalism User and I was just wondering what you think, it would do tasks such as reporting bad username, removing vandalism and other anti-vandalism edits. it would not be a bot, I would operate it manually without a script and I would just like to know what you think.Tellyaddict 19:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would not participate in RfA's or deletion/discussion debates to avoid sockpuppet claims, I'd probably use the same password for each account, what do you think now? Tellyaddict 19:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please unblock or see if its blocked for the IP: 62.136.40.51. It will not let me create an account under that IP address as its been restricted. Could you please make it available. Cheers! Tellyaddict 19:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, I'd still regularly edit under this account but just use the other for fighting vandalism.Tellyaddict 19:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the block against 64.8.131.172, spared me the time to report to AIV. Time I am wasting right now... back to VP. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done whatsoever, thanks again. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My userpage

You're welcome! Glad I could help. Will (aka Wimt) 20:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In need of advice...

Hi. I was browsing through some recent changes, and I came across this. The user made the edits him/herself, so I am not sure if the content shouldn't be there. What should I do? --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You make everything so simple and obvious. Thanks. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 21:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blatantvandal template - not final?

This is in connection with the vandalism on temperature, which has now stopped. I added blatant-vandal as I usually do in cases where an editor has more than once added what is just intended to annoy or shock, and when the vandalism was clearly continuing, moved to WP:AIV. I noticed that at [2] you added a uw-vandalism4. Now, what I'm not sure about is whether blatantvandal, a useful template, doesn't count as final, or whether there was some other circumstance which meant that you put a warning (e.g. the fact that it seemed to have stopped)? In such cases I want to be sure I am not reporting on WP:AIV unnecessarily, or causing delays to the protective blocking of active vandalism. Thanks for any insight you can provide. Notinasnaid 20:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Level zero language categories

Hi there. It looks like we still have five level-zero language categories:

I still need to do a little work with the MediaWiki API to figure out which templates still contain references to level zero cats that have been deleted. Mike Dillon 06:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list of users I found to still be in level zero categories: User:Mike Dillon/Level zero users. I removed all the references to level zero categories that I found in templates named "User...-0", but these user pages are still hanging around. They're either in the job queue or they have a template with a level zero call that I didn't find yet. Mike Dillon 07:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed Template:User iso15924/category-intro, although it shouldn't matter much since those categories aren't supposed to exist anyways ;) Mike Dillon 15:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are still a few loose ends.

Many of the users left at User:Mike Dillon/Level zero users have subst'd versions of level-0 templates
Some of the template inclusions that had categories removed still need to get through the job queue, or may need null edits
There are still a good number of templates linking the "does not understand" text to the deleted categories
Some of the level-0 userbox templates have the base language category on them, which doesn't seem to make sense (for the same reason that identifying level-0 users with a category doesn't make sense)

I'm going to have to take a break for the time being, so hopefully this can all get sorted out later. Mike Dillon 15:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]