Jump to content

User talk:Rick Block

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kriminal99 (talk | contribs) at 04:30, 30 December 2006 (Removal of Content). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If you're here to respond to a comment I posted on your talk page, feel free to reply on your talk page (so the question and answer are together). I ALWAYS watch talk pages I've posted comments to for a while. If you leave me a message, I'll respond here unless you ask me not to.

Archive2006 - Archive2005 - Archive2004

list of FA editors

Caould you add featured lists to your script, or create a separate page? It would be nice to honour those editors as well. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's done in two steps, one that starts with the FAC logs to produce a table with a month's worth of the by-year lists like Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2006 and another to parse the by-year lists to produce the WP:WBFAN table. It looks like Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations is done mostly by hand at this point. The first step could start with the featured list logs, but unlike the second step it's not fully automated (the logs aren't quite regular enough to reliably determine who the nominator is). What I actually do is run a script that parses the logs into an intermediate form which I check by hand against the actual logs, and then run another script using this intermediate form to generate the table format. After updating the by-year list, the second step is done with yet another script that reads all the by-year lists and generates the WP:WBFAN table. The second step is actually the easier one since it's fully automated, but it relies on the existence of the by-year lists. I'd be happy to make the scripts I use to generate these lists available, but don't think I can take on generating by-year lists for featured lists. If you (or anyone else reading these words) would like to, please let me know and I'll make the scripts available. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Template:SCOTUSCase

Left comments on the template talk page. --MZMcBride 03:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page layout

Hi Rick, that's much better, thanks! I think I did something almost exactly like that earlier but I missed out the |'s on the end of the lines containing the formatting... oops. Thanks a lot for helping out, much appreciated. --YFB ¿ 19:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if you can help me again - for some reason there's a big gap between the intro text box and the three columns of contributions, which my table editing skills don't seem to be up to fixing. Would you mind having another look for me? Thanks =) --YFB ¿ 21:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two things

I've been thinking of some templates to aid in navigating categories and categorization of articles. It is Radiant's talk page so perhaps you could take a look? Respond there if you feel like it.

I'm guessing you've been pretty busy recently. You seem to have missed my recent posting on your talk page which you archived without responding!

I hope all is well. -- Samuel Wantman 08:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at Radiant's page. Things are fine, but I have been kind of busy. I recently spent a week in the UK on business, which has led to an extremely busy time at work. Sorry about archiving without responding - I simply missed that one. Rather than subst template:LargeCategoryTOC into cat:LP and change it to eliminate rare combinations, I think it might be better to create a version without the rare combinations (perhaps the default version should be the pruned one and the current version renamed LargeCategoryTOCFull or something). There still seem to be fair number of folks who absolutely hate the underlying template:Navigation bar. I'm not quite sure what to do with it at this point. Discussion on the talk page has pretty much stopped, but there's been no real consensus. I may list it at TfD to try to generate more discussion. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

addLoadEvent

Hi, one of your user scripts uses the addLoadEvent( func ) function (see [1]). This function will be removed from MediaWiki:Common.js soon. Please modify your scripts to use addOnloadHook( func ) instead. —Ruud 18:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Marilyn

There wasn't much more to it than I mentioned in the article. The full text will be available on-line on Tuesady here. This version of the problem seems even more counter intuitive, since the same exact scenario has different odds depending upon what Monty Hall knew before he opened a door. The most disconcerting part of it was that the odds go from 2/3 to 1/2 because there are times when he guesses and opens the door on the car. In the example in the paper, that did not happen. So this is a good case for how the odds for something that could have happened in the past but didn't can still have an effect on what will happen next. I'm sure there'll be lots of discussion about it on the talk page. -- Samuel Wantman 09:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

The new US court template is wonderful. Thank you. Ratherhaveaheart 18:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Left project...

No, I really don't have any way to check that automatically. I'll remove this user, and when I get time I'll look all the users manually. Ral315 (talk) 05:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting, however, that he just left the project last week. Usually, people like you notice them before they pile up too much. Ral315 (talk) 05:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if you've got it lying around, I'll bug you for it (no hurry; feel free to send it via my talk page or e-mail when you have time to dig it up). Thanks. Ral315 (talk) 05:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've Earned Yourself Another Barnstar!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I, Persian Poet Gal, hereby award you this barnstar for all the kind and considerate help you have often offered to new users at the Help Desk :). ¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category structure

I think Samuel's idea has merit; it worked fine for tagging cats as "self-reference" and such. I've created Wikipedia:Category structure for central discussion on the topic; please participate. Yours, (Radiant) 16:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Denver Metro

Like most metropolitan areas in the United States, the extent of the Denver Metropolitan Area is largely contextual and the subject of lively debate.

Most Colorado counties are extensive. The three suburban counties adjacent to the City and County of Denver are long and narrow, with high population densities at the end of county near Denver and very low population densities at the opposite end:

  • Arapahoe County is 72 miles long and 4 to 12 miles wide.
  • Jefferson County is 54 miles long and 4 to 18 miles wide. (The southwest corner of the county is a wilderness area.)
  • Adams County is 72 miles long and 6 to 18 miles wide.

There are several overlapping, officially designated Denver metropolitan regions:

There are many additional unofficial and quasi-official definitions of the Denver Metropolitan Area.

The Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article started life as a Denver Metropolitan Area article. While the label Denver Metropolitan Area is almost universally used in the metro area, the name of the article was changed to Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area to coincide with the United States Census Bureau designated Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau also designated a Denver-Aurora-Boulder Combined Statistical Area. The definition of the Denver Region used by the Denver Regional Council of Governments is the most common used locally.

I recommend that the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Area article be retained (and possibly renamed to the more popular Denver Metropolitan Area) for general information about Metropolitan Denver. The portions of the article that deal with a specific regional entity such as the Denver-Aurora Metropolitan Statistical Area or the Denver Regional Council of Governments should be moved to those articles. --Buaidh 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Featured candidates by month

Oh I had no idea. I hope by making the list I didn't annoy you since some people enjoy performing some tasks themselves. I don't wanna take any work away from you if you enjoy doing it. If you wish for me to take over this process for any reason, I would be glad to use your scripts. Thanks. - Tutmosis 17:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the response. I'm definetely interested and I'm running Windows. - Tutmosis 18:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, I'll definetely check that out. - Tutmosis 18:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template proofread

Hello Rick,
It's been a while. Can you do me a favor and please proofread this infobox template before I implement it. You can make comment about it and see an example of it here. Thanks. —MJCdetroit 02:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref desk cleanup, help needed

As a user who has expressed interest in dealing with misuse of the reference desk, you may be interested in my comments at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Where we stand and my new strategy for dealing with the problem at User:SCZenz/Reference desk comments. It will take help from many people in order to make it clear which behaviors aren't appropriate. -- SCZenz 03:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian translation

I speak Albanian, and I'll translate Wikipedia talk:Searching#alban skenderaj for you by the end of the day. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance w/ photo

Hello, I found you in the Wikipedia talk:Image use policy page and I just wanted some input on a photo I recently uploaded. You can find it here. I used the "work of a US gov't" fair-use tag but I think that might be incorrect. Could you let me know what you think? Thanks alot. Naufana : talk 00:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My sig

Hi!

Q: Is there some reason you need a link to your contribs, or your current focus article?

A: I don't really care much either, and if you find it makes to code for the sig too large then I'd be happy to remove it. Really it's just a copycat thing: I've seen many people use 'contribs' links in their sigs, so I did the same.

Q: You're presumably trying to drum up interest in your current focus article with the other link.

A: I've just removed it.

Cheers, Yuser31415 06:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Denver

Are you complaining that I removed the same advertisement text that you removed (though I also removed the link to YouTube). Let's be clear. We get a spam link every three seconds. We are not even beginning to catch the ads that are going into articles posing as encyclopedic content. Perhaps if we were to deal with the problem instead of worrying about the feelings of spammers, we would make some headway. Danny 21:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You use rollback for edits that are bad. It is all rather simple. In fact, I was around when rollback was instituted. Danny 04:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When we get thirty thousand links a day, most of which are spam, as well as constant attempts to put advertising copy on our site--when SEO agencies have forums devoted to how to game Wikipedia--I am had-pressed to come to the conclusion that the people who are adding these links and ad copy are much better than the vandal that writes "poop" all over an article. They are simply cleverer. Danny 11:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry... -_-

I was'nt thinking straight when i did that. 12hernn 01:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC) P.S. my account name is now User:Animine, and your unknown origonal source quote came from Mark Twain.[reply]

Am I correct in assuming you're responding about this? And, if you have a source for Twain being the originator of the quote I'd love to have it. It sounds like Twain to me (maybe "hung" rather than "shot"), but I can't find it (and I've looked). -- Rick Block (talk) 01:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On voting

As long as this kind of attitude continues, I see little hope for being able to move forward. I asked a couple questions I consider relevant- depending on the answers, maybe this needs to go to RFC or something. Friday (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extra spaces in the infobox city template

Howdy RB,

We are having a minor problem with the Template:Infobox City and I was wondering if you could give it a look. I detailed the problem on my talk page and have some sandboxes set-up too. For the sake of a continous discussion could you please reply over there. Thanks, —MJCdetroit 01:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at it. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rick. Thanks for your message. I tried working on this but the current complexity of Template:Infobox City is too high for my brain to handle. I tried some transformations but failed. I can't fix it. For my taste, this is out of control. --Ligulem 00:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this?

It looks like a reasonable way to handle the large TOC problem without using scroll bars. What do you think? -- Samuel Wantman 22:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't seen it. I'm not much of a fan of the show/hide thing, but it seems to be proliferating. I still don't understand what the violent objection to the scrollbar thing is about. Given the very, very strong feelings the scrollbar seems to bring up, I suppose the show/hide thing is probably a better idea. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"geography" class

I have removed this from the stylesheet. There is no reason why a couple of infoboxes need their own separate styling. The infobox class is to give infoboxes a consistent look. We should also not be overriding skin colours. Feel free to create more semantic classes such as the "mergedrows" subclasses to create the layout you need, but don't use subject-specific names. All colours should be put in monobook.css (these will be grey, grey and grey...). ed g2s • talk 17:46, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

santa says...

Hey Rick, happy xmas/holidays !! - Abscissa 12:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Friday

When, exactly, are you going to do something to stop them from harassing Friday, I wonder? Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

If you wish me to disengage from the users in question, I call on you to enforce my ban on them from taunting me on my talk page. Failure to enforce this will likley result in me reengaging. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I expect that you will take corrective action if he fails to listen you you adequately. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so

You know, I unwatched all of the pages this was going on at - I unwatched friday, unwated the reference desk talk page, unwatched everything. But, even after all of that, I still get to see this, because I didn't unwatch the actual reference desks themselves (which I will not do). I am considering acting agressively, but would like your opinion on the appropriate level of agression. Thanks. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You certainly are giving him a lot of chances to keep taunting me. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis

Rick, I got your message on my talk page and will respect it. However, I do not understand why User:Hipocrite is allowed to behave the way he does and I believe that the comment you removed was truthful and I will be glad to provide diffs as evidence if you will ban him from harassing Reference Desk editors. There are multiple administrators that see his comments and attacks and do nothing, giving the appearance of approval of his actions. -THB 23:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The type of baiting and insults that User:Hipocrite posts would have resulted in a ban long ago, had it been done by an inclusionist. StuRat 23:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am less interested in the past than in the present and future. Hipocrite has agreed to remove himself from the situation. That's good enough for me. I know he is watching this page and I urge him to not comment in this thread. I do not condone the behavior of nearly anyone involved in any of this. I know you, THB, think you were unfairly blocked and I suspect LC thinks he was as well. You're pursuing action on this through the Friday recall, which I assume you realize is being taken seriously (even if it turns out not to have the result you're interested in). This situation has been far too hot for far too long. Please try to help cool things off. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rick Block, generally I say what I think and I don't know why anyone assumes that I think I have been unfairly blocked and I wish someone would please show me where I wrote that. I haven't commented on that either way, either time I've been blocked, at least that I recall. I can't speak for Light current.
This statement by you and so many others trivializes why this petition was submitted. There has been serious mistreatment of editors by a few admins plus Hipocrite and it has gone completely unaddressed.
I'm not just concerned about the particular incident this morning. Hipocrite is constantly uncivil and makes personal attacks and nasty comments and games the rules and is frequently reported by many people from all over the encyclopaedia. Admins see his comments and do nothing. He's on a crusade and no one stops him. If someone neutral went through a couple of pages of his "contributions" word for word he'd be permanently blocked from Wikipedia. He doesn't contribute to the encyclopedia, but trys to act as a hall monitor.
Frankly, if Hipocrite, Radiant and SCZenz were subject to recall as editors or administrators, Friday would have been fourth on the list, not the only one. What I have seen condoned here by so many is appalling. There have been no changes in behavior and no apologies. The irony is that Hipocrite might actually believe he is helping the encyclopaedia when he is incapable of seeing just how much he hurts it. -THB 01:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to have assumed something that might not be true (I must have misinterpreted these comments). Mistreatment by admins is a serious allegation. Is this strictly in reference to the actions at the reference desk over the past month or two, or is there more to it than this? And, would you include me in your list of abusive admins (just checking)? Like I've suggested to StuRat, help is available from a variety of sources (for example, Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates).
I'm not going to comment on the behavior of the specific folks you've mentioned, although like I said above I do not condone the behavior of nearly anyone involved. I'd be willing to bet that everyone involved (not just Hipocrite) believes they're helping the encyclopedia. Is this something we can all agree on? It might not be much, but maybe it's a start. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that SCZenz and Friday believe they're helping the encyclopaedia and that they generally do, but sometimes act inappropriately. I don't have an opinion on Radiant about his beliefs but see him act inappropriately.
Hipocrite may believe he is helping but his actions are so out of line with so many guidelines and policies and general standards of human interaction that with him I believe it is irrelevant whether he thinks he is acting for good or not because his actions are so contrary to that. Look over his contributions. He is only here to be antagonistic. He makes no contributions to the substance of the encyclopaedia. Worse, he drives off good editors. At the risk of being accused of personal attack, he just seems downright hateful, as my mother would have said. -THB 02:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I didn't answer all of your questions. I am still capable of assuming good faith with you. The abusive editors I named. It has been concerned with the Ref. Desk. My comment you misinterpreted was to StuRat about what is considered consensus and was not even a criticism of Bishonen. I would also have to say I don't know Lars but from what I have seen so far he is extremely appropriate to act as clerk and I also must praise Friday's behavior in the face of the recall petition. Others would have reacted differently. -THB 02:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will also say it's about time someone started commenting on Hipocrite's behavior. He's out of control, a rogue editor. -THB 02:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hippocrit

I thought he had promised to stay out of things yet postings from him are appearing. So why did you delete my post to his page/--Light current 02:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He explicitly asked you not to post there. I'm trying to keep the two of you from doing things you might both regret. If you look, you'll see I've asked him not to revert your changes. Good enough? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Content

Hey... You removed some content I put on the MH problem page despite the fact that it was being discussed, your questions were addressed, and you offered no counter argument.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rick_Block&oldid=97278127"