User talk:Worm That Turned

User	Talk	Articles	To Do	Toolbox	Subpages	DYK	Awards

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message!

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Adminship

I noticed that you don't even have an RFA. I was fairly surprised, as you are a very productive and useful editor. Is this because the area you edit in (mostly adoption and DYK's, right?) does not require use of admin tools? Ryan Vesey (talk) 03:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting question. I guess I don't see Adminship as that big a deal. I'm tempted to run, but just don't seem to get round to it. It's in my "things to do on Wikipedia" pile, along with making a featured article. Last time I looked at the process I saw all sorts of problems and got myself involved in WP:RfA reform 2011. I've had an editor review with a view to running, but it wasn't too helpful.

As for the areas I edit in, yes, that's a big part of it, I don't really need the tools (though I've recently started working in OTRS, and I think I might need them there). I wouldn't even say I'm that prolific in DYKs, or article work in general. I keep meaning to work on a few more articles, but other things get in the way. Perhaps one day I'll run, but there's no rush, just need that final push. Worm^TT · (talk) 03:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, well whenever you do choose to run, make sure you notify me. I need a few more opposes under my belt<--total joke I want to be the first support. I really wish that the editor review process would be better. I want to go up for it sometime, but I was sort of disappointed when I looked at it a while ago. I would prefer discussion by many different editors. Ryan Vesey (talk) 03:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate that. Don't get me wrong, the editor review process is very good, in certain circumstances (I think it helped another one of my mentees), it just didn't help me. Worm^TT · (talk) 04:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Turns out, after thinking about it for a few days... Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Worm That Turned Worm^TT · (talk) 09:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

So, question... did this section have anything to do with the fact that you actually applied then? Ryan Vesey (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

It's been in the back of my mind for a little while. This, the extra comments at my editor review, OTRS, and a few other factors pushed me over the edge. But yes, it was a factor, so thank you. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Editor review

Hi Worm,

I'm thinking of going in for an editor review now that I've finished my mentoring programme to see what other editors think of me now. How exactly should I go about it and what sort of reviews should I expect? What will they be commenting on? and things like that. Thanks for your help as ever Worm, Rcsprinter (talk) 19:50, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest you just be upfront about what you want it for. Perhaps explain that you were blocked for a short period and have come back and undergone mentorship, and you'd like an independent review of your edits since your block. The how is pretty self evident from the from the WP:ER page ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 20:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Fine. Just what exactly might reviewers say, and comment on, and will there be any sort of verdict or consensus? Rcsprinter (talk) 21:47, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Just realised I didn't reply to this, sorry! They could comment on anything, in a similar manner to RfA, but there's no verdict or consensus. The idea is to get you some feedback so you can improve in the future. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Worm That Turned. You have new messages at Cryptic C62's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Award

	Award
	for no reason Puffin Let's talk! 12:08, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Why thank you! I'm the first RfA since the Wikilove feature appeared, so I have a feeling I might get a few more of these... Worm^TT · (talk) 08:27, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Good job!

		Wikipedia Motivation Award
		Good job with all the work you, Swarm, Oli/Pyfan, and Kudpung are doing on RFA reform 2011! (Oh, and have an early congratz on your to-be-successful RFA!) Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I've only got an hour to go, and I still don't want to jinx it! Worm^TT · (talk) 08:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Kiefer

Thanks Worm. I still believe it was right for the material to remain on the page; however, I self-reverted per the reasons cited in the history. Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

No problems Ryan. I do actually see Kiefer's point of view, it's not really useful information (and I'd even do away with the userbox for anyone), but the way he went about it was not correct. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's one for you

		The Adopt-a-user Barnstar
		Thank you for the considerable work you put into your adopt-a-user program. The information I learned about speedy deletion criteria was invaluable to my contributions on Wikipedia. Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Aaah, barnstar craziness! That's 3 awards in the last 4 posts, how am I meant to keep up? Thanks a lot Ryan, you really didn't need any tuition from me, but I'm glad I've helped you feel more confident on the 'pedia. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

So, about adopting some users myself...? Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Having got to know you, your level of competence and your temperment, I think you'd make a fine adopter, go for it. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Having gone through your adoptions school, I believe it is completely unfair to any adoptee who does not go through a similar school. Do you mind if I steal your program? I will modify it as time goes on, and will probably do some modification before I begin modifying as well. Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do, I stole it in the first place :D Worm^TT · (talk) 08:57, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Ha, I thought I saw something about it being "ruthlessly pinched" and I guess you commented during the copyright lesson that it was stolen. Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Not that there's a reason to, but I feel a strong urge to "sign off". It's 4 am here and I have to do truck in the morning. Stupid hour and a half edit war converted to discussion kept me up way past my bedtime. Ryan Vesey (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I can't claim credit for the idea or the layout, though I wrote all but 3 of the lessons, and all the tests. Best thing to do is take it, and change what you don't like :) Sleep well Worm^TT · (talk) 09:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on your successful RFA! Now only the 'crat has work to do in flipping the bit! :) Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:31, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! My initial reaction to your support was a "Yeah, right, chance will be a fine thing", but I'm pretty glad I was wrong. Thanks for the support :D Worm^TT · (talk) 10:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! I knew you would pass with flyingt colors! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:07, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

...and have done so. Congratulations on a strong showing. Now, get to work! –xeno^talk 12:31, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Work?!? No one mentioned work!! Cheers Xeno ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 12:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Allow me to toss my "congratulations" in here too! Enjoy your "RfA is over" time. 28bytes (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much 28bytes, and thank you for your supportive email during my RfA, it really did help. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

☆ Congratulations! ☆

	☆ New Administrator ☆
	Congratulations I hereby award you, Worm, for successfully becoming a new Wikipedia Administartor! With over 120 supporters, you have got to be proud! Keep up the excellent work! You will do great as an administrator, as you have always done as an editor. -- MelbourneStar☆ (talk to me) 12:29, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Blimey that was fast. Did you have your finger on the trigger there? Thank you :D Worm^TT · (talk) 12:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I had the Successful request for Admin. page under my watchlist + with the new WikiLove, I decided "hey, why not?" =) Can't believe you're administrator! I mean I can...but I can't...if that makes any sense. Again Congratulations! New privileges and a mop, will do you good. PS. If you're not too busy, can I make a big start on my User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/MelbourneStar1? Thank You -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 12:41, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course you can, it's there, ready for you the moment you are ready for it :) Worm^TT · (talk) 12:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, sounds like a fine addition to the admin corp--SPhilbrickT 13:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

My very best congratulations. It proves that RfA is not broken when it concerns truly deserving candidates :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad your candidacy succeeded, welcome to the corps. I hope you have fun. -- Atama頭 17:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Slightly late congrats from me too. Just think, now you can do all your great adoption work with new users - and then block them! Hahahahah! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Congrats from me too. –BuickCenturyDriver 02:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yay! VERY well deserved! Cind.amuse 03:38, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yaaay! Whoop, whoop! I'm so pleased about that! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 05:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all, it's an amazing feeling when so many editor that I hold in high regard not only come out to agree that I am trustworthy enough to hold the mop, but also come to my talk page to congratulate me. Now, a few individual messages!

• @Sphilbrick, I meant to say, thanks for your comments at Sandy's page, I'm sure they'll help me with building any future articles.
• @Kudpung, I really appreciate your comment at the RfA, and will be writing a little at RfA reform about my experiences (did that questionnaire thing ever go ahead?)
• @Atama, I really appreciate you showing up, since I don't edit much in the same areas as you, but whereever I've read your comments (especially at the "drama boards") I've always noted them as some of the most clueful on the encyclopedia. So, your comments really do mean a lot to me.
• @Boing, thank you especially, your comments regarding my mentoring a few months ago (when I took on a couple of editors you were involved with) really confirmed to me that I was doing the right thing, so I really apppreciate that!
• @Cindamuse, all the help you've given with a certain user really does show, he's made significant improvements and I appreciate it. I also see you were quite perceptive on me not wanting to put myself forward!
• @Pesky, thank you very much, I hope I can be the admin you thought I already was!

Again, thank you all. I'm made up, I really am. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Great Worm. :) I would also strongly suggest that you be open to recall. -Porch corpter (talk/contribs) 09:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Dya know, you're the first person to mention recall to me, which I find quite surprising due to my lack of experience. As it happens, I like the idea of recall, and will be open to it, once I choose which version. What's more, I'll go further and say that I will be willing for any future changes to the adminship role to be applied to me also, even if it does not automatically apply to current admins. (For example, if admins term length comes in for new admins but not existing admins, I will happily take on a term length) Worm^TT · (talk) 09:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations - to you and to Wikipedia :-) I'm very pleased to see you adminified. --bonadea contributions talk 09:42, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Bonadea. I really appreciate your comment at the RfA, the skills you've mentioned are ones I've always aspired to have, though I don't remember doing them! Worm^TT · (talk) 10:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hehehe, "administartor"... --Σ ^talk_contribs 22:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm back worm!

I'm back worm! The computer rocks! (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back Tcr! Let me know if you want to carry one with your adoption school. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

New tools

Hey Worm, how does it feel to be an admin? How are all the extra new tools? Would it be possible for you to email a screenshot to me so I can see what they are like? Rcsprinter (talk) 17:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Heh, it just adds an extra couple options to the top of the page, makes people's names in the history look like "Example (talk | contribs | block)" rather than "Example (talk | contribs)" and adds a "(del/undel)" option to page histories. :P Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

It feels pretty much the same as being an editor, but knowing theres over 120 editors who think I'm doing a good job is one helluva lift. I've fiddled with the new tools at the WP:New admin school and deleted a page in my webspace - it's a little overwhelming to be honest, I doubt I'll be using them much! As for what they look like, wander over to the school, it will tell you a little more. Otherwise, it's exactly as Reaper Eternal said. They're all text extras, I don't have a funky red image block button or delete button like I'd hoped ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 08:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, shame. Should be like that. BTW, sorry for not being on much recently, I'd like to be but my internet is not working. Typing this from a different computer. Rcsprinter (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

You will need this for all the work needed mopping. I'm sorry that I missed your recent RfA, but congratulations are in order. Bearian (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Not to worry, Bearian. Thanks for the cupcake! Worm^TT · (talk) 10:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Admin

Good job, and since you got adminship on 2-for-1 day... --The Σ ^talk_contribs 22:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC) I was worried wasn't going to get the t-shirt! Thanks Σ! Worm^TT · (talk) 08:51, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Congratulations on being awarded the mop! All the best Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 10:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
• Congrats. I'm sure you'll do a fine job (just don't let it distract you from articles on Cornish cuisine!). Feel free to ping me if you need anything. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Cheers HJ and Brookie, I really appreciate it :D Worm^TT · (talk) 14:10, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Reichsfurst

As you can see I have successfully managed to change my name to remove the frustrating umlaut but I'm not sure how that affects our various pages.

Apparently the formatting of the web urls I've used on Elizabeth Maitland, Duchess of Lauderdale isn't satisfactory for DYK.

And, of course, congratulations on your successful RfA! Reichsfurst (talk) 07:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

And much better it is too. I'll move your Adoption page accordingly :D I should have mentioned the citation template before the DYK, sorry about that, but it looks like you got your head around it very quickly. And thank you for the congrats! Worm^TT · (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dudemanfellabra

I must be getting old - I had of course already voted on it. Anyway, it's now been withdrawn b the candidate. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Indeed you must. Since we were talking about Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/E2eamon and you hadn't voted on it... *chuckle* Worm^TT · (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh sh**! 62 and ready for the bonfire already. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixing non-free image problems

Hi again. I saw your note to Δ and just wanted to let you know about Wikipedia:Fixing non-free image problems, if you didn't already. This is a document that Ched Davis and I wrote to help people understand why a non-free image was removed from an article; Δ has been kind enough to link to it in his edit summaries. Any suggestions you have for making that doc more user-friendly and/or publicizing its existence more widely to folks to help prevent edit-warring over images would be much appreciated! Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 16:21, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I'll also have a read and see if I can suggest any improvements. Worm^TT · (talk) 18:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Good luck (seriously)

I also saw your note to Δ. Kudos. (I concur that Wikipedia:Fixing non-free image problems is excellent, and deserves wider use, I'm happy to hear that Δ is linking to it.)--SPhilbrickT 17:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Like I say, I'm not going to be able to fix 2.2Mb of issues in one swoop, but I thought I might tackle the problem from a different angle, see if I can improve things bit by bit... Thanks for the note though :) Worm^TT · (talk) 18:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

NPP

NPP is still in a very sorry state. I've done my daily NPP stint today and I've warned more patrollers about wrong PRODS and CSD than I have deleted articles. I'm thinking of starting a mentorship programm for New Page Patrollers - they just don't seem to read our page at WP:NPP that Snottywong and I rewrote some while back. Would it be a good idea? Have you any advice to give me? The next step is probably going to be an RfC to make NPP a user right like reviewer. Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:10, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Ryan Vesey

Ryan Vesey has recently asked for access to AWB; however, due to his limited experience and this recent incident, reasons which made me wary of granting him access to a tool that might create a massive mess if misused, I have declined his request; Rian has invited me to ask for your opinion, though, for you have extensively worked with him since the block and he feels you should be able to offer an opinion as to his fitness to handle the tool; so, if you wish, I'd welcome a comment from you here. Thanks and cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

According to a Anon. I'm a F-ing Idiot, for not allowing Original Research into a BLP

Hey Worm! I'm having extreme difficulties with this specific anon.,User talk:94.21.194.220, on articles Zsolt Semjén & György Matolcsy. S/he keeps on adding paragraph(s) of information that have not been sourced. I have reverted them 6 times on each article (yes that is 3 times over 3RR, but I'm reverting under a 3RR Exempt: "Removal of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced contentious material that violates the policy on biographies of living persons (BLP).")...This anon. just won't stop, and in each revert I have made, I have mentioned in the edit summary: "Unsourced - See WP:OR" and in one of the edits, the editor come accross it and has asked what "OR" means (obviously to mock me). The cherry on top is that the editor called me (excuse me for saying this) a "Fucking Idiot" (This and This) And although I have come accross in my 8 months here many rude editors, I think this one is a bit of a stretch, and really disrespectful, because I was just doing the right thing and removing unsourced (probably false..who knows) material from Wikipedia. It kind of kills me inside knowing that I can't take control of an issue and that I have to ask for an Administrators assistance, but I have run out of options. -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 13:43, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

...Replied -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 16:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

RfA voting

What we need is either a bot or a 'press button' script that can check voters for members who have registered less than 7 days (168 hours) before transclusion, blocked users, and users against whom an SPI has ever been filed. Some Wikipedias have similar feature or a 'check yo ur eligibility to vote' It is feasible here? It could be useful too if ever we introduce minima for voters.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

BTW: this is going to tank - would it not be nicer to SNOW it before it gets embarrassing? Or at least mail the user with a few supportive suggestions. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll certainly be keeping more of an eye on RfA for a while. That was closed (probably in part due to the message you left), and I've closed another today. I'm not sure how well any of the RfA reform stuff would have helped them.

Regarding the "check your eligibility" idea, it's an interesting one. A bot could easily remove things based on criteria, and I think that a push button "check your eligibity" is a good idea in principle. However, the button is redundant without a way to enforce it (say, a bot or a software change to physically disallow editing the page). Actually... couldn't we just semi-protect RfAs as a matter of course? that would stop all IPs and non-autoconfirmed editors voting. Opinions could be added to talk page.

I'm just curious as to the "users against whom an SPI has ever been filed", that could lead to all sorts of problems. What if the SPI is Unlikely? Or Fishing? What blocked users are transcluding? I think we've got to be careful about fixing problems that aren't there... Worm^TT · (talk) 09:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Semi protection only prevents for the first 4 days if the voter can make 10 quick edits somewhere. this is semi protected. On the other hand, the template that is called by the 'Nominate yourself' button at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Nominate is not. I've also been trying to figure out how I can put that new edit notice on it, because I think that's the reason the other one is not being seen - there are two very different ways to transclude a RfA. Uhm... does all that make sense? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:37, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I was just thinking semi protection was a quick and easy solution :) You're right about the edit notice not being seen... I'll have a look at that. However, what you could do is change the nominate form - {{RfA/subst}} - and put a hidden comment in there using <!-- --> tags in. - Futhermore, it'd be good if the two different buttons did different things, they currently do the same thing, with different labels. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I thought about a hidden note afterwards, but I had to get some sleep. I had also noticed that the button loads the same template page. I think duff noms are relatively rare - we seem to have a spate of self-noms recently. The nomination and transclusion process is so complicated I'm surprised that the obvious NOTNOW self-noms manage to do it! We had one tank last night (3rd RfA attempt) who didn't even write a nomination statement. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I saw it. That's 4 fails in as many days including one who hasn't edited since. Certainly makes me want to get RfA reform sorted. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

We need to starty drawing up some proper drafts for proposals. I think setting a low bar for candidates is now the most urgent priority, and possibly introducing a software block for it if it persists. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:54, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Justified edit, or retaliatory?

User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz made the following edit [1] at Denial of Death. Are articles on books which use the book itself as one of its citations OR? The user strongly opposed my RfA and seemed to reveal a strong POV in doing so. In addition externally cited material (material for which the source was not the book itself) was also removed. Seems more like this user has an axe to grind, based on his reference to schizophrenia on my RfA. An additional reason for my comment is to address a statement you made on my talk page: "What's more, the outcome of your RfA has little or no effect on anything outside of RfA, there is unlikely to be any consequences". I just get the vibe that this edit was solely made as a consequence of my RfA, from a user who really did not appreciate my request. I have contributed little to the article in question (I don't generally start/edit articles on books) , but do maintain a great interest in the book. Thanks for your feedback. --TimL (talk) 10:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi TimL. Looking at what happened here, I'd assume good faith and believe that Kiefer felt his edits were justified. He does appear to be helping the encyclopedia and I can certainly see his point of view that the work there is original research. The specific part of the OR policy that is salient here is WP:PRIMARY which explains that any interpretation of a primary source must be done by secondary sources, not on the encyclopedia.

You are right in a way though, the edit is likely done solely because of your RfA - however I think the interpretation is a little off. As part of RfA, many users (myself included) do a thorough review of the candidates contributions. Some users focus on the articles the candidate has contributed to and in what state the candidate left the article. I think Kiefer looked at the article in the current form and edited it as he saw fit. He has every right to do that per WP:BOLD, and I don't believe it was retaliatory or malicious in any way.

Whether it's justified or not... I wouldn't like to say, and would suggest taking it to the talk page of the article, discussing the matter, and perhaps bringing in a WP:3O from someone who knows a bit about the area. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Backlog

There is a backlog at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention and I was wondering if you could take a look at it if it is still there when you log on. Ryan Vesey (talk) 00:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Whilst that's a pity, I just don't get UAA to the extent that I could tackle a backlog, and I've got a few other things that I'm working on that I'd rather look at than learn UAA. As it happens, it looks like it's been tackled anyway, so perhaps this is moot. Worm^TT · (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm Back

I'm back now, hope you didn't miss me too much. Jenova20 09:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back. You've missed quite a lot! Have a read of my userpage to get a flavour... ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 09:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFA! =]

Jenova20 10:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Worm?

How do you get advanced user rights? The computer rocks! (talk) 14:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Question

What are user rights and am i'm ready for more? The computer rocks! (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Admin

Go see my user page for the question. The computer rocks! (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Afd question

Is wikipedia a vote for afd? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The computer rocks! (talk • contribs) 14:47, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Please

Please see me at my adoption hq! :) The computer rocks! (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

What?

What happened to my adoption hq page? The computer rocks! (talk) 14:54, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Temporarily archived while you were away. It's still at User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/The computer rocks! Worm^TT · (talk) 14:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Can I take a test Worm?

Test please :) The computer rocks! (talk) 14:58, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm done

I'm done with my test! :) The computer rocks! (talk) 15:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

RfA

See this (3rd attempt). It doesn't stand a chance. Alone the nf image warning on the tp are enough. Can it be stopped before they waste their own and our time? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Attribution

Could you check to see that I correctly attributed Thomas Bridges (Anglican missionary) in the page I am creating at User:Ryan Vesey/Missions to Patagonia? Ryan Vesey (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I also created attribution from one of my earliest edits. I split List of games that support Wii MotionPlus from Wii MotionPlus. Ryan Vesey (talk) 19:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Both are good. The edit summaries are the bit that really matter - and they're both correct. The attribution on the talk page is an added bonus. Worm^TT · (talk) 19:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Trial

Any idea why this is suddenly no longer listed at WP:Cent? (see template and version history). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'd suggest asking Cunard - [2] - he seems to have removed it. His edit summary implies that he may have wanted to replace this with this. I can't see a reason for the removal though. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:00, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, he seems to have fixed whatever he was doing. OK - I as getting worried. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

500th edit!

This is my 500th edit! The computer rocks! (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

RFA edit notice changes

Not sure that is needed as we already have Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, which is seen when editing the main RFA page. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

True, but when setting up my RfA I didn't notice the transclusion notice, by the time a user gets to transclusion, it's often too late. I think we should be trying to catch people's attention earlier. It only shows for creation of new RfA pages, and isn't saying anything new. Worm^TT · (talk) 19:18, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Worm on this. In fact I designed the fancy template. It's also true that even I found the transclusion process rather complex when I did my own RfA, and I don't recall having seen any poignant warnings when I did - not that I would have felt addressed by them if I had. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Test

I took the test Worm! Please reply on my talk page when your done grading,thank you. The computer rocks! (talk) 12:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Phone Hacking Scandal

The Daily Mail is using a private investigator who is using illegal methods to obtain information and has used him 952 times, almost 5 times as much as the News of the World did. Worth adding to the article? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14150348 Thanks Jenova20 13:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Very interesting. But... "It is on the statute book but has never been enacted, meaning it can not be used by judges or magistrates." is a pity. Anyway, as to your question. There's problems with usng it in the article. Firstly, it's POV - written to imply the Mail is 5x as bad as the NotW, while the subject is noticeably different. Secondly, they were found doing it in May 2006, while the act wasn't brought in until 2008, so whilst not ethical I'm not sure how illegal it was at the time. Appears to be based on 1998 Data protection act, so was illegal at the time.

It's worth watching the story to see how it develops but at the moment I wouldn't add it - there is no deadline and I don't see that it's notable, rather than news, at the moment. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

This is exactly why i ask you this stuff Worm =].

From you it's an answer and explanation, whereas in the talk page for the Daily Mail it would be met with a strong No and accusations of some sort, threats, and requests for an apology.

Thanks Jenova20 14:42, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Glad I could help :) Let me know if it develops further and I miss it Worm^TT · (talk) 14:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I only spotted that section by chance, if it develops it will most likely be spread across multiple papers Worm.

Thanks though.

Currently looking to join Pastafarianism as a religion, seems perfect for me and strange to see one that doesn't just talk about peace and love but actually shows it aswell =]

What do you think?

Thanks Jenova20 14:56, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I grew up a catholic, was even taught by monks! But I've not really followed religion for a long time. I can't see the point of following an parody religion... However I always chuckle at the flying spaghetti monster when I see it on the back of cars. Have you considered unitarianism? Worm^TT · (talk) 15:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Well logically to atheists (me included), all religions are parodies.

What's the difference between a religion made up now and one made up years ago that denies it was made up?

Sorry if you found that offensive lol, some might take that pretty badly.

The difference is i'd never join any religion with the Pope as figurehead or one that preaches love and acts in a hostile way to certain demographics.

Thanks Jenova20 15:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Just as a point of interest, the fact that something is on the talk page of someone who won't take offense to it doesn't mean it won't be read by someone who will. It is usually safer to keep potentially offensive comments to yourself, or state them in a forum that is not public. Ryan Vesey contribs 04:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

While Wikipedia isn't censored and there's nothing wrong with the views expressed here, the conversation isn't benefiting WP, so let's take it offline. Jenova, I'll email you. Worm^TT · (talk) 07:27, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright question

If I take a picture of the cover of a book, can I upload it to commons as a free use file or is it still not considered my own work? Ryan Vesey contribs 04:40, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Not free unless it's a book you wrote. And maybe not even then. 28bytes (talk) 04:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. So it would be better to use a professional image I find on line under a fair use rationale and only upload to Wikipedia, right? Ryan Vesey contribs 05:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Yep. 28bytes (talk) 05:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, 28bytes is right on the matter of copyright. If you take a photo of a copyrighted item, the copyright remains with the original copyright holder. Glad that's all sorted :) Worm^TT · (talk) 17:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was still copyrighted, but I decided to ask because I hoped it wouldn't be. Ryan Vesey contribs 22:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Equine

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Equine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 06:17, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Help Needed

Hi,WTT Could you help in re-promoting Delhi as a featured article. how can i improve that article? Regard's.. Roh^G ??· 10:20, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Mentor/adoption

Hi. I know you run an adoption school and there is a user that in my opinion could really use it. They appear to want to edit but are having trouble with Wiki-spam issues. Could you take a look and maybe offer to help them? User_talk:Since_10.28.2010. This will not be an easy one in my opinion, but if you do take it on then good luck.--v/r - TP 19:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm a little nuts, but I'm giving it a go ;) Worm^TT · (talk) 09:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Hello. I see your userbox says you are open for mentorship? Yes, I am User:Since 10.28.2010. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 00:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm looking into this. I'm busy today, but will reply tomorrow :) Worm^TT · (talk) 08:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Thanks a lot. I would give you a barnstar, but I prefer not to get reblocked for the same reasons. Thanks again, A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks like I'll be taking you on Since 10.28.2010. Will leave a message at your talk page. Worm^TT · (talk) 09:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you An editor since 10.28.2010. 14:48, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Worm That Turned. You have new messages at Calmer Waters's talk page.
Message added 01:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ryan Vesey contribs 01:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

RcsprinterBot

I am trying to start a bot. I have read the bot policy, and the box at WP:Bots/Requests for approval/Instructions for bot operators, and made an unblock request at its talk page (where you can see what it'll do), but I can't really write Perl or anything. You may not be the botty person either, but I'd thought I'd ask as you're my mentor. And admin, who I look up to. Rcsprinter (talk) 17:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, well, let's take this bit by bit.

1. What do you want the bot to do?
2. Can it be done by something like WP:AWB?
3. Could someone else do it? Wikipedia:Bot requests

Depending on your answers, I'll see what we can do. (Am capable of running a bot, I'm a computer programmer, but I don't specialize in Perl and I don't see anything that needs a bot at the moment...) Worm^TT · (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ze bot shall do:

1. Updating articles related to buses (my speciality); such as updating the lists of routes and formatting pages and things;
2. Help me with my projects, which will need lots of repetitive edits too tedious to do manually to pages, which will include: adding symbols to UK stations, disambiguating links and correcting grammar;
3. General bot work such as dating tags and stuff.

I know Smackbot is run by AWB, but I tried downloading AWB and it doesn't work on my computer. Also, I have no idea how to write Perl or any other script. Wikicode and HTML is about my limit. If you're a computer programmer though, I'm sure you can help. Maybe we could name it WormBot, after you. :-)

I'd like to do the bot myself. Be an honour. Do my duty to the encyclopedia. But I need the code writing first before I put it to Bot Requests for a trial, so... Help. PS: Sorry for always seeming to come on a Friday night, when you come off, but I tend to have most time at the weekends, so I do it then. If we didn't have that inconvenience, we'd be able to work together quicker. We also seem to clash on weekdays; I come on around four, when you come off. Oh well. Rcsprinter (talk) 19:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but I generally try to avoid computer programming when I don't have to ;) If you'd like to try doing the bot yourself, it's going to be a case of sitting down and learning Perl - which is something I'd have to do too, if I were to. I'm sure I could debug code and possibly learn it a little faster than you, but it's not a code that I'm familiar with. Imagine you could speak English, French, German and Spanish. This would be Italian... so yeah, you might be able to see similarities, but you'd still have some learning to do before getting anywhere.

I'm quite happy not having a bot, it's not a road I'm currently interested in going down, too much work :P AWB wouldn't work on your computer if you haven't had a request accepted. Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. Assuming you have Windows, it is without a doubt the simplest way for average joe to get a bot up and running...

Don't worry about the whole ships passing in the night thing, it does happen and it could be worse! Worm^TT · (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Er... should I just learn Perl then? Or is there an easier language I can try? Rcsprinter (talk) 20:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm working with The Earwig to help me write a bot now, thanks for your help. Rcsprinter (talk) 19:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Email

Please disregard the commitment I made in the email. When I wrote it, I had forgotten the reason I had not made the commitment earlier, I will be gone for 2 weeks and will rarely be on Wikipedia in that time period. Ryan Vesey contribs 06:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

thanks Ryan. I'll keep that in consideration Worm^TT · (talk) 06:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

One question. Just so I can get used to the adoption process, when I am online can I help out some? I will continue my normal habit of helping and correcting the user but I was also wondering if I could respond to a test if you are offline. Since 10.28.2010 and I are in similar time zones so that would help as well. Ryan Vesey contribs 13:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do. If I feel you've missed anything then I'd add it and I'd appreciate it if you do the same for me. I've no problem with this being a "joint" adoption/mentoring, though I think it's probably a little tough for your first adoption so your time away is a convenient happenstance. But you're welcome to run through the course, as the similar time zones will help. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Delhi

Hello,WTT Could you help in re-promoting Delhi as a featured article. how can i improve that article? Regard's.. Roh^G ??· 11:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi rohith goura. Sorry if it appeared I was ignoring you, Iv'e just been snowed under for the past few days and I have been working through my walk page bit by bit. I'm afraid this isn't really something I can help you with, I've not managed to create a featured article as yet, so I'm not someone who would be able to give you good advice on how to improve it. What I would suggest is a possible peer review, where someone more silled in writing articles could give you more helpful suggestions. Worm^TT · (talk) 11:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Admins are getting lazy again

So, articles are not being speedy deleted. Do you want to take a look at my CSD log or wherever you go to see the articles that are tagged for speedy deletion and delete some of them? Ryan Vesey contribs 14:15, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, yes, I COULD do the deleting, but I got into this admin business to help with what I do, rather than to start clearing all the backlogs. There's only 52 there, and yours haven't been there too long, I'm sure an admin more familiar with the area will get to it presently :) Worm^TT · (talk) 14:26, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Nice one

...for this. I think you've got a promising candidate there - well meaning and enthusiastic, and just needs a little guidance -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Cheers BsZ!, 3 seperate editors asked me to, I could hardly say no! Worm^TT · (talk) 14:39, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Test done

I'm finish with my first adoption test Worm! 17:21, 20 July 2011 (UTC)