User talk:Floquenbeam

Notes

Normal humans: I'm not always around much; if you're looking for admin help, I suggest pinging another admin.
Admins: If you think one of my admin actions was clearly a mistake, or is no longer helpful, please just undo it without feeling the need to consult with me or gain consensus somewhere first. Please let me know you've done so.
WP:SOLVED
WP:LIGHTBULB
WP:VOGONS
WP:BEDFELLOWS

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

popups

read your comment on Bish's page about "admin" showing in popups ... I never noticed that before. Glad you mentioned that - sometimes I tend to miss the little, albeit obvious, things in life. TY. — Ched : ? 00:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of service. You learn all kinds of tiny, interesting (and usually useless) bits of info stalking Bish's page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I learned a few things stalking your page as well. :) — Ched : ? 02:11, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And a third of them were true! --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello F. I've turned on the popups, at your suggestion on Bishonen's talk. Thanks!
In answer to your not-totally serious comment here, I've checked the recent history of WP:AN3. In any dispute, you can suspect the one with fewer edits :-). Of 37 3RR cases in the last archive, there were 17 blocks issued but only three of them were given to anyone with more than 500 edits. In fact, the rate of blocking was 58% (14/24) for those with less than 500 edits, and only 23% (3/13) for those with more. EdJohnston (talk) 02:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've misunderstood; I block the admin over the non-admin, and the experienced editor over the newbie. :) (thanks for the statistics from ANEW; something to mull over.) --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Useless? What about the wonderful suggestion from Writ Keeper on my page for putting a little crown into all admins' sigs (at my request, because I'm clever too), so as to keep their royal nature always in mind? I have implemented it, and I certainly hope you lot have, too. You're all admins, I see (at a glance!), and I know you'll find it especially delightful to see your own sigs crowned. Really improves a person's sense of self-worth! Bishonen | talk 14:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Eh, I caved in and did it too. I think I either never knew or forgot that Ched gave back his tools, so it was useful that way. (Smart man, Ched.) But now I'm going to waste hours looking thru unicode characters for something more appropriate than a crown. Is there a unicode for a dunce cap? Or one of those propeller cap beanie things? Ooh, I bet there's one of those Greek tragedy/comedy drama mask thingys somewhere! --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, this is much better. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably precluded by the NPA policy from revealing the symbol I use for admins. Perhaps this ⍡ moplike symbol would be appropriate for general use? unicode table provides many choices. NE Ent 19:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about ✋ (i.e. "talk to the hand"), but I like my drama symbol better (for now). Plus, you're bluffing: you don't have any symbol installed. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The best signature tool is this one, which strikes through blocked users' signatures. Ryan Vesey 20:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

importScript('User:NuclearWarfare/Mark-blocked script.js');

Ooh, that is handy. Thanks Ryan. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pff, only if you have my css hack that changes the strikethrough to a little "direct hit" (🎯) next to their name, or two for indefblocks. That'll learn 'em! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where would this hack be? I looked on your common.css page and didn't see anything with a 🎯 on it... --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was a joke; the strikethrough is fine. Easy enough to make, though, if someone wanted it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Got me. It seemed like something you would have done. Speaking of "easy enough to make", how hard would it be to whip up something that put different symbols next to (a) various other user rights (eg checkuser, oversight, crat, rollbacker, etc) and (b) non-user rights, probably determined by belonging to a category (only current example i can think of is Arbs). Not asking you to do it, just curious how hard it would be; the answer will help determine whether to ask ~~you~~ someone to do it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, to be honest. I'm not entirely sure how Amalthea's script works; I haven't looked at the source closely, though i don't think it's that hard to figure out. The problem is figuring out what rights a person has. If you have to make a request for each person on a page, that's a looooooot of server traffic on a big page like ANI. The last time I read (which was a while ago, so this might not be correct), the way the OG author of the script (not sure it actually was Amalthea) got around that was by having a list of admins somewhere and then checking all the usernames against that list. That way, it only has to make one call (to retrieve the list) instead of potentially hundreds (one for each user, to examine their rights). I know that there are things that run off categories, so presumably there's an efficient way to look up categories. Anomie's link classifier script, that colors wikilinks based on whether they're stubs, dabs, redirects, nominated for deletion, etc., which I recently suggested to someone else, is one that works like that. I'll look into it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, after looking at it, that's what it does; it runs off a list of current admins at User:Amalthea_(bot)/userhighlighter.js/sysop.js, which is (obviously) maintained automatically by Amalthea's bot. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, maybe I can work a deal: Amalthea gets his bot to maintain a list for the other userrights, and I rewrite his script to use JQuery. It needs JQuery. Badly. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JQuery? Category:Things that just went sailing over Floquenbeam's pretty little head. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It makes things easier and faster; basically, it would replace a lot of the lines of code in his script with only a couple lines. Anyway, the MarkBlocked script (which is actually imported from the Russian Wikipedia, where it's a standard gadget, interestingly enough) works the same way Amalthea's script works, so no luck there. I see how to do it with categories, but the problem is that not everyone is in the categories they should be in. For example, the only category Newyorkbrad is in is Category:Wikipedia administrators, so there's no way to tell from categories alone that he's also on Arbcom. That's why Amalthea maintains his own list of admins to use. So...it'd basically take a bot to keep a page up-to-date with the appropriate lists. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting; we'd just need to create a separate up-to-date list of Arbs. Thanks, Writ, this is all over my head, but fascinating just the same. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we're talking about javascript tricks, is this hidden by any chance? It's a twist off of a similar trick to hide things from peons like me. Hopefully it doesn't work. Ryan Vesey 21:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dang, well now I don't. I was sort of hoping NE ENT and I could have a conversation behind your back. Ryan Vesey 21:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just logged out to look, as I thought you were yanking my chain. I'll be damned. I had no idea there was an actual "sysop-show" class. Fascinating. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's some serious discussion somewhere about using it for attack pages instead of blanking. Ryan Vesey 21:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Squeaky

I wasn't aware that I had had any involvement with Johnny Squeaky when I first reverted his edit (not that it matters,there's no WP:INVOLVED for undoing someone's edit) but in any case, I checked his talk page and contrib histories. You might want to keep an eye on him for a while. Ryan Vesey 20:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Color me confused; I didn't accuse you of being involved anywhere? Certainly not intentionally. Unless you mean you just realized you'd dealt with them in the past? Anyway, I would have reverted if you hadn't, no one could argue with your edit there. Yes, I was just looking over their talk page history, and have now watchlisted his talk page and the article. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't assuming or implying you had accused me of anything. I was more or less heading off an expected response by Johnny, he didn't seem to happy with the last time I got involved with a matter involving him [1]. Ryan Vesey 20:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, back in January. Yes, he does seem to spend quite a bit of time unhappy with other people, doesn't he? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Yup. Go Phightins! 20:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoniel Blanco

You just deleted Ottoniel Blanco twice. It looked to me like an autobiography. In that case, the author, User:El Blanco Facil (talk), would be a sock of indef-blocked User:Ottoniel Blanco (talk)). I'd prefer not to go through a full SPI, especially since the behavioural evidence was just deleted... Thoughts? Huon (talk) 23:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they're obviously the same person. I'm not a fan of using FAKEARTICLE for autobiographical user pages, but agree it should probably have been deleted anyway for, as DS67 put it, "the user's own good". When User:Ottoniel Blanco was blocked, sockpuppetry was mentioned; is there more to this, do you know? I'm probably going to block EBF as a sock, but I'd like to have all the background first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I need to leave for a while, so rather than wait for background I just blocked them for socking. Background would be nice, but it wouldn't change the fact they're indef blocked, and now behaving more disruptively than before. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I cannot provide any background information on earlier sockpuppetry; I happened upon Ottoniel Blanco via a help request on the now-deleted article talk page and got curious enough to dig a little and noticed that User:Ottoniel Blanco was indef-blocked. We don't seem to have an SPI on him; I just checked the archives. Huon (talk) 00:24, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Take responsibility

You blocked me for making one edit in a week, when those opposing the edit had stopped participating in the discussion. Tom harrison reverted my last edit without further comment in Talk. He has taken the position that only the Christian view of the resurrection of Jesus is germane to the subject. This is likely an area where Wikipedia's principles don't coincide with consensus. Will you contribute more than blocks? Right now, my edit has been reverted by an editor who has made no further contribution to Talk. His edit summary about undue weight is absurd, given that the material in question is one sentence. Help. Strangesad (talk) 01:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is, Tom harrison reverted to the consensus version. See WP:DR for what options you have if you want to continue this, but right now, it needs to stay out until there is a consensus to include it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean by "the difference." I didn't compare him to myself. I pointed out that the consensus process is essentially discussion, so when people stop participating in discussion, the consensus becomes unclear. The rules about consensus don't entitle anyone to revert without discussion, indefinitely. Strangesad (talk) 06:00, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New users often think that they have seen some great truth, and that their situation is unique. However, the kind of disruption evident at Resurrection of Jesus is an everyday occurrence here. Some thought about how articles would look if articles were written based on which editor was most persistent shows that re-adding and re-adding similar text is not going to work. Please ask at WP:HELPDESK about standard operating procedures. Johnuniq (talk) 11:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

...I added a block template to LaLaLAND's talkpage and attributed it to you (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK by me. I'd already added a hand-written note, but LalaLAND removed it as "spam"; I figured it didn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. But your addition doesn't hurt anything either, so all's well. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LOL ... I saw your response at John Carter after I left this note here ... we're all too efficient (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We're so efficient, we're inefficient. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:41, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Think you misplaced a post...

This is probably not in the right spot (think you meant to post to the WT:AC/N but instead posted to WP:A/R/M) - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 17:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Penwhale. No, it's where I wanted it. Hersfold is now saying, in the Arbs-only section above mine, that a full case is required to reseysop if an admin is desysopped per this motion. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know he replied to you; however, you posted it in the Motion discussing the possibly policy change (which is in WP:A/R/M), not the Kevin (temp) desysop (which is on WT:AC/N) - so logical reasoning led me to assess that you might have put it in the wrong place. Apologies! - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 17:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had tricked myself into commenting on Kevin (like many others in the Motion thread), but before I saw your note here I'd already removed that sentence. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:38, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thanks for protecting my talkpage Elen of the Roads (talk) 02:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]