Jump to content

User talk:Huntster

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Loghead1 (talk | contribs) at 02:23, 20 June 2008 (Corner Gas and User:Loghead1). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

1 2 3 4 5
edit
purge
view
Moderate to high level of vandalism 4.78 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot 18:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) Greetings, you recently moved Good Enough to Good Enough (Evanescence song) and redirected it to its disambiguation page. This move has been reverted, because the Evanescence song is the only song with that name to have an actual article. Since all other versions are redirects, the 1) existing or 2) most notable article takes the primary name. If you have any questions, please leave a message on my talk page. Cheers! Huntster (t@c) 02:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the discussion to Talk:Good Enough and replied there. The way, the truth, and the light (talk) 02:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: further discussion located at Talk:Good Enough (Evanescence song)#Page move. Page was eventually moved back to TWTT&TL's article name.

Thanks

Thanks for commenting at User talk:Danorton. It is getting weird. Look at the response on my talk page. I am not sure what is going on so I have asked a question at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). It is no big deal, of course but some things just make you go 'huh?'. Lightmouse (talk) 22:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WPFISHING

(X-Posted) Hey, I noticed your edit at {{WPFISHING}}, are you trying to add the nesting function, or do something else? If you need any help with functionality of the template, let me know and I'll fix it up. Cheers! Huntster (t@c) 22:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, {{WPFISHING}} won't nest properly, and I don't know why. Much gratitude if you can fix it. --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) No problem, give me some time and I'll see what I can do. I may do some code overhaul too, but at the very least, I'll use my pre-existing {{WikiProject Tennessee}} and a template so everything will work fine off the bat. Huntster (t@c) 22:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Huntster. There is still the problem of the extra white space at the top, as you pointed out earlier. --Geronimo20 (talk) 00:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) In all the pages I test-checked, it wasn't showing up. Are you seeing the problem on a certain article? Huntster (t@c) 01:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. On Talk:Whitby it has extra white space at the top in its collapsed state. --Geronimo20 (talk) 01:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) Heh, yes, that is actually from {{WikiProject Yorkshire}}, which I'm working on right now :) Huntster (t@c) 01:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good stuff! --Geronimo20 (talk) 01:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My helpme request

(X-Posted) I am currently trying to track down a version of an article from a long time ago. I know that a user edited a certain article in a timespan of about a year, and I know exactly what the edit they made was. Is there a quicker way of finding the edit version rather than searching through the entire history of that article looking for it? Thanks, TheMoridian 09:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) As far as I'm aware, there is no way to search the history of an article. However, what is the article in question, and what are you specifically looking for? Any hints on that timespan? Huntster (t@c) 09:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. The article in question is the Russia article, the edit made to it consisted of changing the capital city to 'Stockport' (and may possibly be followed by a revert edit by the same user), and the time period is from September 2006 to May 2007. I'm 90% sure that it was before January 2007 but I can't be certain. Please reply on my talk page, and thanks for your help. TheMoridian 14:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) Oh my. That encompasses somewhere around 2,500 edits, which at the rate my computer loads pages, would take around eight to ten hours to manually check (yeah, best speed is four or five pages a minute, tops). There's just no way I can go through that many. Best I can recommend is either narrow the timeframe a bit, or start at this diff and work your way forward. Huntster (t@c) 02:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:) I was expecting something like that. I'll search manually, thanks anyway. TheMoridian 09:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note

Note: cross-posted from User talk:Dihydrogen Monoxide.

(X-Posted) Just a quick thanks for the Betacommand Commons endorsement. With any luck I'll make some good use of this. Huntster (t@c) 08:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) Not a problem, fingers crossed it'll be accepted. That said, I find using CommonsHelper easier myself, but each to his own. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) By the way, it seems you're not an admin. Why not? Interested? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) I've been toying with the idea for some time now, but I didn't want to self-nom (for no particular reason, really). To be honest, I really only see myself using the mop and bucket for just a few things, such as some vandalism-handling, working with protected pages (especially templates, as that's my speciality along with citations), and a other bits here and there. I'd always be ready to help whomever asks for it, but I'm concerned I'd be more of a very low-key admin, and I'm not sure that is wanted by the community at this time. Still, as I mentioned, I've been thinking about it. Probably best to apply for editor review first, just to get some third-party options as to my ability 'round here. Huntster (t@c) 08:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) I've heard and seen plenty of good things about/from you. You've been around for a while. You've made plenty of edits. You've improved articles, reverted vandalism, and helped people out in other areas. The recent trend at RfA has been for low key candidates... I nudged Kakofonous through most recently, and there have been a few others. Your kind of thing. You up for a nom? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) I think I might be. I do, however, hereby reserve the right to screw up. My biggest problem is that I doubt I can answer many of the questions that will be posed. I simply haven't stepped very far into the areas that are typically asked of. Huntster (t@c) 08:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) My motto is RfA additional questions are not for fishing. IMO the questions are silly and unnecessary. If you're unsure on one and do want to answer, just take it slow. Read the policy, ask around, whatever. There's no rush. Anyway, I'm writing a nom now. Feel free to reject it if you're not feeling up for it when it's done. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) This is appreciated. It will at the very least determine opinion as to my readiness to step into that vasty nothingness. Huntster (t@c) 08:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Huntster is ready when you are! dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) I thank you for your help in this. I'll begin filling it out as RL work permits :) Huntster (t@c) 09:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! Good to see you accepted, looking forward to seeing you pass. btw. did you get my MSN add? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) Not as of yet. I just got a blazin' new computer for home and haven't set up Trillian. Will do when I get off work. Re: the RfA, hopefully I answered the questions acceptably. I don't always know when I'm rambling ;) Huntster (t@c) 01:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(X-Posted) All looks great! dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DHMO

has already offered you a nomination, but I was wondering if I could tag along to? I've been looking over your contribs, talk archives and anything else possible over the past two hours. I've come to the conclusion that you are long time in the waiting. Regards, Rudget (Help?) 16:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(X-Posted) I'd be honored if you wanted to do this. As I mentioned to DHMO, I'll be working on this nom today when I can, but I'm training someone at work, so time is somewhat limited. Thank you so much. Huntster (t@c) 19:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Thank you for letting me co-nom. Rudget (Help?) 13:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA

Wish you all the best for your RFA -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 05:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Tinucherian, much appreciated :) Huntster (t@c) 05:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what exactly you've been trying to do with the template, and attempting to repair it is beyond me. At present it looks like you've reordered the parameters so that the year appears first. I can't imagine this was your intention, so if you could take another look at it, it would be most appreciated. -- Kéiryn (talk) 17:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am quite curious about this. Most maps don't have a proper "author" or a single individual responsible for their creation. I know the Official Michigan Department of Transportation map doesn't have an author. In fact to attribute a map to a single cartographer is the exception, not the rule. As a result of your changes, the year is the first item that shows for 13 of the maps referenced in M-35 (Michigan highway), a recent FA. A few of the other references don't have issue years known and then default to the map title first instead. I would advice that you revert your changes to account for this fact. Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I get your rationale, but for maps, the publisher is more like the author for other reference types in addition to being the entity that actually physically produces the map. In most cases, a year is known and it's very strange to start a reference with the year in parenthesis. That's mostly why the publisher was listed first. I'd still advise reversion to that practice. Imzadi1979 (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deutsch!

Ich habe mein erste Deutsche wikipediaseite! http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villanova_University

Wow. I'm a dork. And you're related to me. Bwahahahah.nf utvol (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Vandalism

Thanks,
WHLfan (talk) 22:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Starship"

Hi. I thought I'd start with the merging of the remaining Stargate spaceships soon since it's been almost two weeks with no new input. Now, someone has contacted me and said that my chosen wording of "starship" sounds too much like Star Trek. So before I go ahead and make more of a naming mess, can you tell me another word that includes everything from F-302 to Tel'tak to Ancient City Ship? Spaceships in Stargate? Starcrafts in Stargate? (I'll rename the other articles accordingly then, including fixing the double redirects.) Thanks in advance. – sgeureka tc 21:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Thanks Done. Let me know if you need anything else from me. -Justin (koavf)TCM04:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Looks like you've gain sufficient consensus to pass, only two more hours now! Well done on such an excellent job: great answers, responsiveness. I look forward to working with you more in the future. Rudget (Help?) 18:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are now an administrator

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 22:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!! :D (Though I didn't manage to vote!) The Helpful One (Review) 22:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well done and also good luck with the mop :) AngelOfSadness talk 22:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations from me as well! --OuroborosCobra (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all :) Huntster (t@c) 02:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5 hours late...but good job! Have fun with the new tools! §hep¡Talk to me! 02:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copying what I wrote at WT:RFA:
In lieu of the thank-spam that so often gets sent (and which I don't care for), I'd like to extend my most sincere thanks to those that commented on my RfA. I will work daily to never cause those whose expressed their support to regret their decision. Thank you all. Huntster (t@c) 08:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rock on mate! dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats. Mr. Admin.. use to mop wisely -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GeoGroupTemplate

Thanks for your response to my plea for help. I will try to follow your instructions on my talk page and hope for the best. If I fail, I will have to come back for more guidance. Best, --Zlerman (talk) 08:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, it's not working for me. I have now saved Category:Mountains of Tajikistan with {{GeoGroupTemplate}} so that you can actually bring up the map and see my problem. I have added {{coor}} templates to three new mountains: Karl Marx Peak, Mayakovskiy Peak, Independence Peak. Still, they do not show on the map, while Avicenna shows on its own, but in the wrong place: Avicenna is Italicized in the category list (redirected to Lenin Peak) and thus should not show at all. The other three peaks on the map -- Lenin Peak, Peak Korzhenevskaya, Ismoil Somoni Peak -- show correctly. In place of the fourth peak ("Avicenna") we should have Independence Peak. I have re-read the {{GeoGroupTemplate}} page, but it seems to deal only with articles, not categories. Can you figure this out and tell me what I did wrong? I am probably missing something about the {{coor}} template. Thanks for your time. --Zlerman (talk) 11:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the latest clarification. I will patiently await the next dump/update, which hopefully will occur not later than August 2008. But at least now I understand the mechanism behind these fantastic maps. Best, --Zlerman (talk) 03:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Helpme

Thank You ;) Heehee Originally, after reverting back the pokimon picture back to the original, my browser continued to display the Pokimon picture even though in the "smaller resolution", however after closing my browser and going in again, the page shows the expected picture. Thanks ;) I had made a wrong request to delete my own page as I was trying to figure out some of the "new" tabs after i enable them in my settings. :p I'm sorry if i shouldn't have replied you here. Enjoy your weekend. :D Best Wishes, Zuff (talk) 15:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Music certification

Hey Huntster, thanks for the note. I think I might have been a little heavy handed with deleting the table from the main page, maybe I should have at least mentioned on the talk page first. But I moved the table over to the talk page, so hopefully all is not lost. Anyways, when I started the page, I took a long hard look at the list at Music recording sales certification and also Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Certifications, and I admit to copying a bit from each. The reason I changed the formatting of the table is for a couple reasons. First, my intention with the new list is to aid in discography articles (specifically for the Discography WikiProject). So if some discography says an album was certified gold in France, the user can go to the new list and check out exactly what that means. So, my main intention was to make it easily accessible. So, I tried to keep only the most relevant stuff in the table (country, certifying body, and awards). Everything else (which probably won't be that useful to 99% of the users) is in a footnote or an in-line citation. Along the same lines, I tried to split the list into multiple tables (rather then one humongous one) to aid in readability and accessability. Hopefully that makes sense.

But there's one thing that you mentioned that confuses me: you said you thought the data was superior in the other table. How so? As I was making the new list, I noticed a good amount of info that wasn't in either of the other tables I looked at.

Anyways, thanks for the note, and I look forward to your response. Drewcifer (talk) 19:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question.

You're still a member of CAP, right? Do you have access to any of the L-Tronics Little L-Per equipment? —  scetoaux (T|C) 22:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The L-Tronics article I linked to is in desperate need of pictures to illustrate the L-Pers. I figured you probably had one of the older wooden ones, since most squadrons do. But since it'd be a lot of work for you, I'll look elsewhere. Thanks anyways! :) —  scetoaux (T|C) 23:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. All else failing I'll take the pictures myself. I just don't do so because whenever I have access to them, I'm supposed to be using them, not taking pictures. :P —  scetoaux (T|C) 23:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that would be terrific. :) —  scetoaux (T|C) 22:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Book of Mirrors

According to someone's comment at Talk:Book of Shadows a fellow named Gary Cantrell makes reference to a "Mirror Book" in his book Wiccan Beliefs and Practices. I had originally assumed it was a Scott Cunningham innovation, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It has no notable place in Wicca as far as I can tell (it's certainly not part of traditional lineaged Wicca, what I call "Wicca"), and it's been without citation for a very long time (first at Book of Shadows and now in the Book of Mirrors article). It's obviously simply a magical diary rebranded with a wiccanesque name, probably invented within the last 5 years by a two-bit author cashing in on the neopagan publishing frenzy. I would be all in favour of deleting it. Maybe if we ever have a Magical diary article the concept could be revived for a brief mention in that. Fuzzypeg 23:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. User:Loghead1 keeps adding the same two inappropriate links to the Corner Gas article. He doesn't seem to be a spammer in general, so I can't really put him or his sites on the spam noticeboard, and I'm the only user to have contacted him about this issue so I can't get an RfC for now. You also undid his edit at least once as it's obvious that the petition and "fansite" (which is really a social network site for a very restraint group of people) are inappropriate links. He added them again, despite my message on his talk page, he responded on my own talk page, claiming neither links violate the guidelines (all spammers say that of course...) and I can't remove them a third time today without violating 3RR. Would you be so kind as helping me with this matter?--Boffob (talk) 23:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your swift action. I contacted the user again. Hopefully he'll understand eventually.--Boffob (talk) 00:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I enjoyed being ganged up on, I would much rather you didn't do it again. Thank you! Loghead1 (talk) 02:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, i dont know?

I guess i accidentally made my page like that, but after i did i sort of liked it that way i guess. So can you revert it please? I actually want to make it black with red letters, but i dont yet know how ( even though i know quite alot, just not that). Thanks,' T'ratos theGreat>|< —Preceding comment was added at 01:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC) [reply]


Huntster, please undo your edit

I dont know how to, i just messed it up. Tratos —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tratos the Great (talkcontribs) 01:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]