User talk:MER-C/archives/24

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless there's a better place for them. Please read the following helpful hints before posting:

• Wikipedia is a volunteer curated encyclopedia. That means it is not a social networking site, a place for self-promotion, a marketing medium or a free web host. You are expected to be familiar with the goals of this project before you post here.
• Think. Use common sense. Read this before posting; failure to do so may result in your posts being ignored or mocked.
• If you wish to discuss your link additions, I advise you to be read our conflict of interest and spam policies before posting. These pages contain information about the appropriateness of link additions.
• I prefer to be contacted here (as opposed to email) where possible. You're much more likely to get a prompt response.
• I do not consider unblock or undeletion requests sent via email. Please refer to Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks to appeal your block. You may request undeletion here.
• Off-wiki evidence of undisclosed paid editing must not be posted here. These, and complex cases of paid editing will not be acted upon. In both cases, please email paid-en-wp wikipedia dot org.

Start a new talk topic

Re: Wikipedia:Goings-on inversion

Wow, sounds pretty impressive. Inverting the Goings-on list for FPs won't upset the other Featured content projects that are doing it ascending by date the old way will it? How does it go with handling noms with edits and alts, and with distinguishing between Commons and Wikipedia hosted images? --jjron (talk) 07:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Re 2/3, where I saw the relevance was whether it will 'untag' all the {{FPC}} tagged edits & alts, and add the {{missing image}} tag to Commons images. Or are they still a manual thing? --jjron (talk) 08:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Well that explains that then. --jjron (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Saw your note on FP talk. Just thought I'd let you know I found a batch of FPs under Portals rather than Pictures on WP:GO - see here. Was that a bot bug or human error? If it was the scripting should be easy enough to tweak. I just closed a stack of FPs, but will leave what's there now for you if you're planning to run the script on Sunday. --jjron (talk) 10:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure how you've got it working, but maybe someone added a subheading somewhere or something? Guess you'll just need to double check it works correctly, at least at first. OK, will leave it to you to close for a while and see how it all goes. --jjron (talk) 16:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

History Animated Links in Civil War Articles - Discussion Please

Hello Merc, I read your user page and have carefully read the Wiki rules about spamming links. And I agree with them.

I am asking your permission to reverse the undo on the links in several of the articles. Please let me explain.

I missed the history warning on the "removed spammed links". I am not a Wiki expert and did not know to look for them. I made the incorrect assumption that they were removed for some other purpose. If I had seen that, I would have initiated a discussion before doing anything. I know better now.

I asked for an opinion from the person who is the driving/guiding force behind the entire Civil War Project - Hal Jesperson. He states "I think your animations are well done and don't object to judicious inclusion as External links. My concept of judicious would be to select only the most important or relevant places to link. For instance, Gettysburg has dozens of articles about the campaign and battle and literally hundreds of articles about men, women, and units who fought there. I'd recommend linking only from Battle of Gettysburg and Gettysburg Campaign (assuming you also animate the campaign as a whole)."

The only warning I had ever known I had received was put into my talk and was an informal warning to which the author of the article responded and actually thanked me for adding the link saying it added to the the article.

So, the key author for the entire project does not believe they are spam and feels they are "well done" and would like to allow them.

The animations are free and take about 200-250 hours each to make. If I could just directly donate them to Wiki I would, but there is no vehicle for Wiki to have these on site. The website is merely a repository for the animations - nothing more. It promotes no commercial products (It has the smallest possible Google ad which, if you find it objectionable, I will remove - it is only there to ensure that Google takes a hard look at the site). I make no money off the site and have no intention of doing so.

There are no screaming banners enticing people to the site in the animations.

Please take a look and reconsider. http://civilwaranimated.com/

The SPAMMING rules say look at your intent: My intent is clear if you look at the material and the websites - I have created a unique way of displaying the article content and am making it available for free. (there is another site, TravelBrains.com which charges $29 per animation for very similar content). I am not promoting products nor myself. And the website is only there as a holder of the content.

Would it be acceptable to you if I followed Hal Jespersen's recommendation and undid your deletion of the links for: The Battle of Gettysburg The Overland Campaign The Battle of Perryville The Battle of Stones River The Battle of Leyte Gulf

Thank you for your consideration, James Cagney Jcagney (talk) 14:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't recommend reinserting the links yourself because you may find yourself being reverted again by someone else citing our conflict of interest guideline. If Hal (or some third party) feels the links are worthwhile then by all means he should add them himself. Our spam archives are full of examples of people spamming their own sites for money and/or ego, so we need to be wary of people adding links to their own sites in a systematic manner. MER-C 09:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Helpful links on AN

Hi MER-C, I just wanted to say that I appreciate the links you posted on WP:AN pertaining to cleanup of unfinished or mistaken edits. I've stolen it for myself on my user page, and I hope you don't mind. Hbent (talk) 05:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I was hoping someone would do that, lest they end up in some obscure archive somewhere. MER-C 05:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

That Comcast IP

I softblocked it for one month--have the sites he's been spamming been added to the meta blacklist? He's been spamming since February, so it might be time to blacklist them both. Blueboy96 13:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

There's no cross-wiki spam so it's going to be very hard to argue for a global blacklisting. I requested local blacklisting instead. Unfortunately the local blacklist request page is backlogged rather badly... MER-C 13:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Tortilla FP

Hi, it's very flattering that you posted to my user page, but I really have to hand back these borrowed feathers. That was Shoemaker's nomination; I only placed the image at one article. Best, Durova^Charge! 05:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

That's what happens when you're distracted by the performance of a certain closing wizard... Fixed. MER-C 06:04, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

external links to www.book-academy.co.uk

I have not visited wikipedia in some time, but on a recent visit noticed that you have removed most of the external links from various articles to the website http://www.book-academy.co.uk. Having read your comments on your reason for doing so (User_talk:MER-C/archives/21#Removal of links to book-academy.co.uk added by User:88.107.126.110) , I admit that as a newbie I was not careful to read the guidelines for external links and that in my zeal in pointing to the resources available on my website I may have come across as merely interested in advertising my website. I can assure you that the links were only placed on the articles concerned because they were extremely relevant.

Another criticism was that the links pointed to a single page which had no anchors so that readers would have to find the works mentioned. We have now rectified this on our site and I am more than happy to supply links to the anchored sections.

May I please ask you to reconsider your decision to remove the links?

Thanking you in advance for your consideration.

SC80.42.167.134 (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't oppose the addition of links to your site as long as they aren't spammed. That said, you shouldn't be the one adding them because of our conflict of interest guideline - you might get a sense of deja vu. MER-C 10:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks, for answering my question :]II MusLiM HyBRiD II 18:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Sensitive but unclassified

I struck your two year old unexplained Context template at the aforelinked article after expanding it somewhat and introducing sourced descriptions of the sorts of material that get flagged as sensitive. Does that cover it, or were you looking for something else? MrZaius^talk 11:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you've got the right person or article? I haven't edited the article you link to. MER-C 14:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - I forgot that SBU was a disambig and not a redirect to Sensitive but unclassified. See your edits here. Again, my apologies for my lazy typin' - MrZaius^talk 15:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I was looking for. The original threw around acronyms with no indication as to who uses them and for what purpose. MER-C 12:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Great - thanks for the followup! MrZaius^talk 16:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Warning

You appear to have given me a warning though I accept this could be a mistake. You have said that i have been vandalizing Wikipedia but I checked all edits and they all appear to have been constructive. All the edits I have done on Wikipedia (of which none have currently happened in October the month you gave me the warning) appear to be fine.

Either a explanation or a apology would be fantastic 83.104.51.181 (talk) 19:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC).

I haven't edited the above talk page in two years. Please be more specific. MER-C 13:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism reversion

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page [1] - much appreciated --Superflewis^(talk) 13:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

FPC Closing Wizard

Hi. Just saw this being used at WP:GO. With modifications, could this work for other featured content? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think so. Once I verify my solution to the ubiquitous (and really annoying) "Wikimedia errors" works, I'll push out a release and the source. Due to various IRL reasons, you're not going to see anything from me towards a "FLC closing wizard" until at least February next year. MER-C 07:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

An Umpteenth Award

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		You've likely got numerous such awards, but I feel the need to provide further appreciation. May your tireless anti-vandal, anti-spam and generally anti-nonsense efforts continue on for many years to come. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 04:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

"Anti-nonsense". I like it. Thanks. MER-C 10:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. Keep up the good work!, Best wishes --Badgernet ^Talk 10:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FCDW

Considering we just had two Dispatches on how to review Free and Non-free images, I assume you mean a general guide to reviewing images at WP:FPC relative to WP:WIAFP? [2] Can you clarify that entry at WP:FCDW? Would you interested in or able to write that? Would you be able to write it soon? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:43, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll take it. It'll take at least a month due to lack of free time and dodgy nominations (I need them so I can back my reviews with the actual outcomes). MER-C 08:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Award

		CVU Anti-Vandalism Award
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user-talk page [3] --Flewis(talk) 10:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Have you seen the thread I spawned at WT:RFA about admin candidates? --Dweller (talk) 15:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes I have. There's too many things on the to-do list right now (e.g. the Signpost dispatch mentioned above) and applying to be an admin is way down the bottom. This FPC has me reconsidering all those declined noms, except I don't think I have a full week for answering stupid questions until... February 2009. MER-C 11:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

To add to the "you should be an admin": here's a log that makes you look like an admin: [4]. Happy protecting, Kusma (talk) 13:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

You just let me know when you think you might squeeze it into your schedule and I'll strongly considering nominating you. --Dweller (talk) 12:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Havana silk dog page edits

I apologize if this is the wrong place to address this but I've had an awful time trying to figure out how to communicate with anyone on this site. I just edited the Havana Silk Dog page to restore it to its original content, content which was placed in Wikipedia with permission from the HSDAA (Havana Silk Dog Association of America.) The page has been under attack by disgruntled members of the Havanese community who are angered over a split in the breed. According to the page history, in Aug 2008 original content was replaced with a malicious, defamatory article by Moorea1307 (Marie Cane, a Havanese breeder in New England who is well known for defamatory attacks on the Havana Silk Dog community.) Once this libelous action was discovered, we have regularly been checking the page to be sure it has not been corrupted again. This morning I found that it had, once again, been assaulted, this time by 'SmackBot' who reverted it to Marie's text so I undid it. You undid mine and I do not know why as my change served to restore the original content of the page and remove the defamatory garbage that Marie had placed there. There has been a long-term pattern of harassment since the split in June of 2007 which culminated in a lawsuit being filed against the Havanese Club of America and settled in favor of the Havana Silk Dog fanciers in Sept 2008. This illegal harassment simply has to stop and we should be able to protect our page by undoing the defamatory changes that have been made to it.

141.152.30.169 (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)Havana Silk Dog Fancier.

Please read our copyright policy for the reason why your contributions are not acceptable. The onus is on you to prove that you have permission to use the text, the instructions for doing so are at Template:Copyviocore. That said, I have reviewed the text and redirected the article to Havanese. MER-C 12:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I am one of two webmasters of the HSDAA and also a board member, from whose website theis material was taken and it is fine with us for it to be on Wikipedia as long as it is not sabotaged and corrupted as has been done (and is now restored.) Havana Silk Dog Fancier — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.152.30.169 (talk • contribs)

Have you followed the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials (which is a better link than the one I gave above)? MER-C 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Pagemove vandalism

Better not use TWINKLE for that again... Hut 8.5 10:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow

Some nasty fight on my user page there, thanks for all the reverts! :) --RazorICE 10:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Lodging my complaint

Hi MER-C,
Just a quick message (to keep things time relevant) to say that I disagree with the closing on this (surprise surprise!) - but I'll discuss it when I have a bit more time (i.e after exams = nov 10). Regards, --Fir0002 10:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Mistake

G'day, thanks for all the hard work at FPC. However i think you made a mistake with Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Brown Tree Frog (7 supports and no opposes or anything). Noodle snacks (talk) 08:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, wizard input error. Fixing now... done. MER-C 08:18, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Good evening, sir, and I am here because of this edit you have made, as you mentioned a manually updating category. I was going to suggest run a bot account specifically for that page. Thank you.--79.73.127.99 (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)