Jump to content

User talk:Rlevse

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dfrench (talk | contribs) at 20:49, 10 March 2009 (→‎Dana L. French article: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


——————————————— MY TALK PAGE ———————————————

User:Rlevse User talk:Rlevse User:Rlevse/playground User:Rlevse/awards User:Rlevse/files Special:Emailuser/Rlevse Special:Contributions/Rlevse User:Rlevse/images User:Rlevse/Notebook User:Rlevse/sandbox User:Rlevse/Todo User:Rlevse/Tools
Home Talk About me Awards Articles eMail Contributions Images Notebook Sandbox Todo Toolbox
My Admin Policy: I trust that my fellow admins' actions are done for the good of Wikipedia. So if any of my admin actions are overturned I will not consider such an action to be a "Wheel War", but rather an attempt to improve Wikipedia. If I disagree with your action, I will try to discuss it with you or with the admin community, but I absolve you in advance of any presumption of acting improperly. We should all extend the same benefit of the doubt to our fellow admins, until they repeatedly prove that they are unworthy of such a presumption. For every editor, I try to follow WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and expect the same in return.


My Day

Thank you for recognizing my efforts. I think you should consider honoring User:Cbl62.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added him to my long list. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks, you're very kind. Tim Vickers (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto to these people; thanks very much, R, you're a great guy. I'm truly honored to receive the 'Pedian of the Day Award from you. Stay well! GlassCobra 14:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An arbitrator?? Well then…

Rlevse, please explain what you think about this appeal (‘Help! Please arbitrate’) posted on WT:ArbCommittee. In a nutshell, the issue is over how the the date delinking workshop now requires 198 “page downs” to go from top to bottom on my standard 1022-pixel-wide browsing window. It is monstrous. It takes ten page-downs on this laptop computer just to get through the index! Yet, there is a profound silence by the administrators. It’s like the jailers locked the prisoners in the courtyard to fight to the death while the jailers go to the break room to watch the game on TV. We posted a Proposal to end this all and in the section where the arbitrators are invited for comment, there is nothing; just (*sound of crickets chirping*). MOSNUM is locked down all this time. Not good.

What is it going to take to get this dispute resolved? I believe it is time for arbitrators to get arbitrating. If they’re thinking that the warring parties will make peace, perhaps *eventually*. If they think that some editors will sicken of the dispute and lose interest, no doubt some will. But if they think that all editors will lose interest and stop warring, not likely. You will note my “BTW” comment on WT:ArbCommittee. This is a proposal to greatly streamline the process to much more manageable proportions. Greg L (talk) 02:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The community sees a mere 10% of the workload that goes into arbing. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK. Understood. It’s like people calling the receptionist at the fuel cell company where I was an R&D engineer. They’ say “You dumb bastards. You need hydrogen to power fuel cells. Well don’t you know that water is two-thirds hydrogen?” Golly gee, we missed that one; thanks Sherlock. So, you are saying that general public doesn’t understand your job. OK 10% of it is understood. Is the other 90% done in the open where it can be viewed? How much—if any—is done via e-mail? And can you be a bit more expansive on what the future holds for visible movement on the above issue? Greg L (talk) 03:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter

23:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

The Signpost
Volume 5, Issue 7
Weekly Delivery
2009-02-16

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.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of United States Naval Academy alumni

It might be best to just split it up into a bunch of sub-lists, and make it a featured topic of its own. I'd be happy to help you with that (and with the other stuff like links). –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean to make subs of the bigger sections (a full MOH list would be 73, CNOs 25 or so, etc)? And what do you do with say the MOH section? List none or few on the main list with a link to the sub list? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like the sublists idea. You could do it by date of graduation, by occupation or by alphabetical order (just a few suggestions). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like this suggestion. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, before you bring lists to FLC, be sure to have their images vetted by an experienced image checker. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
THey're all PD because they're gov images. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1 ?? OK, but if I do it by topic or whatever, do I leave a master page with links to each subpage? What about topics with only a few people? — Rlevse • Talk • 11:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other things:

  • Make the year and name columns sortable (use {{sortname}} for the names)
2 ?? doesn't work with that template. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sort works now. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Featured lists no longer start out as "This is a list of..." or something similar. Start out with a general description of the Academy (see List of University of Waterloo people for an example).
worked. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't see anything of the sort on first glance, but watch out for copyvio in the descriptions.
  • The lead may need a general expansion, more summary of the list maybe. When did the first class graduate?
  • An explanation of the notability criteria in the list would be nice (again, see the Waterloo list).
3 ?? don't see what you're talking about. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think Dabomb means the list needs an explanation of its inclusion criteria. Surely you wouldn't be able to list everybody. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Waterloo article has no such notice. For me they have to meet wiki article notabiltiy standards and have an article to be included. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Left you a present at User:Rlevse/sandbox. The middle names MUST be fixed before you copy this over and some dabbed articles need a link parameter. I used an external editor to convert this in about two minutes. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 12:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow thanks! I'll let you know if I have questions. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?

Hi Rlevse. I have again and again problems with user Parishan, who never spends time to reach a consensus in the talk page, which many time results in edit-warring and move-warring. This user often reverts my edits, for which I had given an explanation in the talkpage, while he did not participated in that discussion. Like today, when he reverted my edits in the Nakhichevan article [1] with an edit-summary which gives the impression that he never read my explanations in the talk page (e.g. this or this). The problem for me is not who is right or wrong, but that he first gets what he wants by means of edit-warring, then he gives an explanation for it. Have you time to take a look at this problem or can you advise whom I can ask for help ? -- User:Vacio 12:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm an arb now, I have to be careful about getting into these things since it may come up in an arb case. Have you tried WP:ANI or WP:AE yet? — Rlevse • Talk • 14:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried WP:AE but with no result. In any case, thanks for your advice. Regards --Vacio 05:35, 19 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.248.4 (talk)

Bureaucratic you are. Human no more. Home I'll be heading. --62.240.86.108 (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello<3

What makes my hands so dirty? --62.240.86.108 (talk) 15:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing. It's a question of me being able to maintain neutrality in future arb cases. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my, this language of yours is so weird! Will I ever be able to master it completely? Now you guess what is my native language. I'll give you a hint. --62.240.86.108 (talk) 19:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What does Rlevse mean? You know R'lyeh? Family you are? --62.240.86.108 (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scouting FARC

You nom'd it, care to help fix it? — Rlevse • Talk • 03:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be glad to, but, honestly, I'm a little afraid to because I think you and I have different editing preferences and styles. I truly care about the Scouting articles and want to improve them, but it's not worth getting in edit wars over, which is kind of why I've just let it go. --Eustress (talk) 03:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, this would have gone off a lot better if you'd discussed it first rather than going straight to FAR. Now we're in real danger of losing our flagship article over what are truly minor issues as the commentary shows. The old real issue was fixing refs and that was done. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for not bringing up issues on the talk page first, and I have requested that the FAR be withdrawn or closed. Thanks for your patience; I have tried to improve some problems with the article. Best regards --Eustress (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The improvements are fine. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: List of United States Naval Academy alumni. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because I'm making a sub page you silly bot. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:CNO list

Well, Full stop is generally used in the UK while in the US "period" is commonly used. Here on wikipedia, that's the name of the article to avoid disambiguation with other definitions of "period". --TRUCO 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well someone is eager for a support. =D--TRUCO 16:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you've overlooked one of my comments, which is why I haven't supported yet.--TRUCO 17:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The one about full stops.--TRUCO 17:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Editor review/Juliancolton 3

Meant to look at your diff, but my Wii remote came over the wrong button and I rolled you back by mistake. I apologize, and I have reverted myself. →Dyl@n620 12:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for letting me know. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome Wikipedian!

I would like to know how you make the "Awesome Wikipedian" award. And do you accept nominations?-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a long list of candidates, most are people I came across on my own, some are nominated by others, just email me the names you want to nom or post them here. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Rlevse, I would like to thank you for the Awesome Wikipedian award. I signed on today to check the spelling of a word for my grant proposal, and found it on my talk page, it brightened my day :). DarthGriz98 01:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! I would like to nominate User:Dr. Blofeld for being in the top 10 of the list of Wikipedians with most number of edits.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 04:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter

21:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 21:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Haseldine

Please could you take a look at this edit where I feel Mr Haseldine is overstepping the mark by dragging a very old talk page discussion over his own POV/COI into the main article space by mentioning the two editors that discovered his socket puppetry in 2007. Note also his recent re-agreement to follow COI guidlines for editing this article, which he has not followed in this case. Thank you. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of what any agreement says, [putting talk discussion into the article is drama mongering and very inappropriate — Rlevse • Talk • 10:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In which case, I am tagging the "Flaws in theory" section as WP:OR which, as is clear from the above discussion, has been conducted by both Deon Steyn and Socrates2008.---PJHaseldine (talk) 12:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I have opened a new case over Mr Haseldine's continued COI. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators Working Group

As lead coordinator of WP:SCOUT, I imagine that Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group would be of interest to you. -MBK004 20:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, but being an arb and all else I do leaves little time for that. Ask Gadget850 and Bduke. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey Rlevse. :) I've just a quick question regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Are users who are not listed as an involved party allowed to leave a statement/comment? Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 20:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. Input from the community is encouraged, it gives us a better view of the issues and evidence. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the fast reply. :) — Aitias // discussion 20:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Periods

 Checking... –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

checkY Replied. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

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 21:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Chergles

Thanks for the heads up, I'll look into it.  GARDEN  21:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sinhalisation

Coming under heavy anon vanadlizing. Can you semi-protect please. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, one month, it's the same IP range, so it's probably one specific user. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hello there. I just sent you an email, so just a heads up in case you miss it. Can you check it out and get back to me when you have a chance? Thanks.

Regards, NuclearWarfare (Talk) 00:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Remark

Just curious. Didn't know who was second -- if it was Purdue, the Air Force Academy, or what. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. JKBrooks85 (talk) 06:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have left a question regarding the source of this hook at the entry on the DYK page. Please respond there. Thanks, -Mitico (talk, contribs) 16:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request.

May I ask a favor of you? I sent you email. Please check your email. Thanks.--Teamitemm (talk) 18:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rlevse. You have new messages at Eustress's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DYK for List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts)

Updated DYK query On February 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 09:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: happy your day

Hi, Rlevse. That's very kind of you. Thanks very much! --Rrburke(talk) 14:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! :) iMatthew // talk // 00:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to thank you, rather belatedly. Studying two exams over contemporary ethics and the history of the criminal justice system of the roman empire takes quite a bit out of a person. -MBK004 06:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
YOu're all welcome and deserving. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work

I'd just like to state how I think you're doing the user base a fine service with your "Wikipedian of the day" messages. Spreading goodwill is something that should really be encouraged here on Wikipedia; the work can sometimes be thankless and stressful and what you've been doing lightens the mood a bit. Great job. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 11:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter

18:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 18:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ping!

You got mail. →Dyl@n620 02:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Way ahead of you. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland naming question

You are receiving this message because you have previously posted at a Ireland naming related discussion. Per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names#Back-up procedure, a procedure has been developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, and the project is now taking statements. Before creating or replying to a statement please consider the statement process, the problems and current statements. GnevinAWB (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

our page-moving friend

If you get a chance, can you look at Special:Contributions/Daerlun and possibly Special:Contributions/VIMEE, and maybe nuke a proxy or two? Cheers! J.delanoygabsadds 22:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Iberian-Guanche inscriptions

Users and administrators were treated as referees for a paper.Editing (by me at least) was continiously dome.ADedletion Discussion (balanced) was closed together with the page by Fritzpoll and an altogether more complete and edited page "Iberian-Canarian" inscriptions was deleted straight away by Kwamikagani,who sent page to Arbitration Comitee.ation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virginal6 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should file your statement at the case at WP:RFAR — Rlevse • Talk • 02:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recall initiated against MBisanz

Brrryce (talk · contribs) has instigated an administrator recall request against MBisanz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), alleging that his deletion of African Americans in Davenport, Iowa (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore) constituted an abuse of his admin tools. I have been asked to clerk this process, and am posting this notice here pursuant to MBisanz's recall policy. This policy stipulates that if five administrators meeting specified criteria endorse the recall request within 48 hours, MBisanz will either resign adminship or initiate a reconfirmation RFA. As I am posting this notice at a number of locations, I would suggest that all discussion be centralized at User talk:MBisanz/Recall. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AF Astronauts

I'll get to work on that within 48 hours. You'll notice that I already took care of USMA. Also, thanks for the reminders. -MBK004 19:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rockin. Thanks for the tidbit. JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conversion complete, I'll reference them tomorrow. -MBK004 06:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And my work is done. -MBK004 21:07, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Rlevse's Day!

Rlevse has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Rlevse's day!
For your dedication to the Wikipedian cause,
enjoy being the Star of the day, Rlevse!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac15
00:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 01:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harrison

Congrats! –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 12:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers!

The Indiana Barnstar
For all your work on bringing William Henry Harrison, a very important article to WikiProject Indiana, through a FAC, I hearby award you, Rlevse, the Indiana Barnstar. Thanks for all you do here. Congratulations!

Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 14:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For you

 The WikiChevrons 
In recognition of your contributions to two MILHIST Featured Articles and two Featured Lists (with more on the way), it is my pleasure to present you with these WikiChevrons. Keep up the good work! -MBK004 00:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WOW THANKS! — Rlevse • Talk • 00:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dfrench blocked

I am not using someone else's name, I am using my user name dfrench.

Dana French —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfrench (talk • contribs) 20:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dana L. French article

Apparently the user "Tedickey", who I am having an editing war with, has removed the article "Dana L. French", can you restore this article please.

Please see the User:Tedickey#Dana_L._French discussion. He apparently does not read the articles before he applies edits.


Dana French

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rlevse&oldid=276359031"