User talk:Henrik

Welcome! This is my user talk page. If you want to communicate with me for any reason, especially about pages I have made or edited, or any administrative actions I've performed, feel free to do so here.

I will generally reply here, unless you request otherwise. Please start a new section for new conversations.

Page view statistics Changed

Henrik, I have been on the Ralph Osterhout article, and I noticed the page view statistics were changed on either 22 or 23 Dec. The article usually gets about 300-400 views monthly with spikes as recently as 18 Dec with 142 views. Now, the statistics have changed dramatically. Is there a reason for this?

On a side note, thank you for your wiki gardening and efforts.(Robert94704 (talk) 21:34, 23 December 2009 (UTC))

Update: The original page view statistics have returned. Thanks again for the the statistics page. (Robert94704 (talk) 23:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)).

Page view statistics

BRAVO for this GREAT new feature! I don't know when you created it, but I just noticed it now. It would be even greater if we can get the cumulative count since the first upload of the file, more useful than the daily or monthly count. And this number should be displayed on the description page, in the File History section underneath Licensing. Thank you very much. Tango7174 (talk) 15:21, 21 December 2009 (UTC).

re. AE

You wrote: "...I find the conduct of User:Anti-Nationalist more troubling, this edit is really beyond the pale. The user's recent conduct is not much better." That edit from May was based on a book documenting Estonia's rate of child abuse [1]. Please look at the number of cases per 10,000 population, which pretty much...err...stands out....by comparison with the rest of the countries surveyed. Now, this edit was pretty wrong, mind you: I did not provide the source and the wording I'd used was extremely poor. You claim that my "recent conduct is not much better." Please demonstrate this–if there are any poor diffs, in which anything I inserted was not awful or not backed by sources since, say, September, I would like to see it. (Sander's friends already tried to blockshop me for Monument of Lihula, except it was found that my diffs were good edits, and I used proper sources.) It's worth noting, IMHO, that accusing editors of "ethnic prejudice" is Sander Säde's standard device: here, he manages to accuse Dojarca of "racism", here Petri Krohn [2] (aren't there just a ton of anti-offical Estonian POV "racists" filled with "ethnic prejudice" running around–like those disagreeing with the offical POV that the trials over Nazi collaborators in the Holocaust in Estonia were staged communist propaganda)? (I find it very strange that all of his opponents–funnily enough, mostly left-wing Europeans / Americans –are "racists" and EEML member Sander is here so as to fight "the good fight" for Estonia...)

As far as Sander Sade's one legitimate complaint, it's been introduced by EEML members into attacks on me everywhere relentlessly:

Character Assassination, double jeopardy and long-term harassment using a single mistake endlessly

1. 14 June 09 by Radeksz on Talk:Crime_in_Estonia (Radeksz introduces it with "Edits like that")
2. 14 June 09 by Radeksz on AN/I (Radeksz introduces it with "Likewise edits like")
3. 14 June 09 by Digwuren on AN/I (Digwuren introduces it with "poorly conceived additions such as")
4. 14 June 09 by Radeksz on AN/I (Radeksz introduces it with "edits like these")
5. 14 June 09 by Martintg on AN/I (Martintg introduces it with "this kind of editing")
6. 14 June 09 by Piotrus on AN/I (Piotrus introduces it with "This (and similar edits)")
7. 21 June 09 by Martintg AN/I (Martintg introduces it with "disruption such as")
8. 21 June by Martintg on User_talk:Shell_Kinney, an admin and AE patroller, (Martintg introduces it with 'absolute nonsense such as')
9. 22 June 09 by Martintg on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case (Martintg uses the present tense to imply a habit or a routine)
10. 24 June 09 by Martintg on User_talk:Thatcher, an admin and checkuser
11. 28 June 09 by Radeksz on User_talk:Thatcher
12. 17 August 09 by Martintg on User_talk:Spylab
13. 25 Sep 09 on EEML/Evidence by Martintg (admitting that this was a climax and not the rule)
14. 28 Sep 09 by Radeksz on EEML/Workshop (introduction: "it was about preventing some bullies from writing stuff like "Children are molested there" in articles on Estonia", mind the plural)
15. 28 Sep 09 by Martintg on EEML/Proposed_decision (introducing it with "stuff like", not mentioning the block)
16. 29 Sep 09 by Vecrumba on on EEML/Evidence (not mentioning the block)
17. 29 Sep 09 by Radeksz on on EEML/Workshop ("If you can't then quit making shit up. On the other hand, I CAN give you an example")
18. 1 Oct 09 by Radeksz on EEML/Evidence
19. 1 Oct 09 by Martintg on EEML/Evidence (Martintg introduces it with "editors who are intent on inserting the kind of stuff like", not mentioning the block)
20. 11 Oct 09 by Radeksz on Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list/Workshop EEML/Workshop (Radeksz does not mention the block)
21. 12 Oct 09 by Radeksz on EEML/Proposed_decision (Radeksz, not mentioning the block: "one of those "far more sober" edits - by his standard")
22. 14 Oct 09 by Sander Säde on EEML/Proposed_decision (Sander Säde introduces it with "bad-faith slander like", not mentioning the block, clarified by Martintg[3])
23. 28 Oct 09 by Vecrumba on Talk:Anti-Estonian_sentiment ("If you go on a campaign to re-introduce your POV similar to prior episodes, such as Estonians commonly sexually abusing their children, the results will be the same.")
24. 28 Oct 09 by Vecrumba on EEML/Proposed_decision ("someone who creates content about widespread sexual abuse of children by Estonians cannot be taken at face value")
25. 29 Oct 09 by Vecrumba on EEML/Proposed_decision
26. 29 Oct 09 by Vecrumba on EEML/Proposed_decision ("On the other hand, you have WP content inserted (wrongly) affirming widespread sexual abuse of their children by Estonians")
27. 8 Nov 09 by Martintg on EEML/Proposed_decision (Martintg introduces it with "Apart from making edits like", not mentioning the block)
28. 8 Nov 09 by Vecrumba on User talk:James086 (admin) ("shall I bring up your edit stating that sexual abuse of children is commonplace in Estonia?")
29. 8 Nov 09 by Martintg on EEML/Proposed_decision (Martintg introduces it with "opposing edits like" no mentioning the block)
30. 15 Nov 09 by Vecrumba on EEML/Proposed_decision ("Is not the "disruption" the introduction of content, for example, per Anti-Nationalist, that child abuse is common in Estonia?")
31. 22 Nov 09 by Sander Säde on AE

A key illustrative article on that note is poisoning the well. Please let me know if these kind of character-assassination and hate campaigns by the EEML members are acceptable. Anti-Nationalist (talk) 17:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll reply on the AE section in the interest of allowing other admins and parties to see the whole picture, as soon as you've refactored your comment per Tznkai's edit. I'll leave this though: My initial thought is that I'd like to see more cases of positive, neutral, non-controversial activities in the area to be persuaded that it'd be a net loss to the encyclopedia to restrict you from it. henrik•talk 18:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I honestly don't know how the post could be more condensed–it's just an answer to both you and Sander Sade (who really brought out the whole EEML saga on AE with his old method, IMO)–the vast majority of that response is just diffs showing the same iteration of double-jeopardy attempts to reblock me from what I was either already blocked for or what was not discussed as actionable by anybody in the past. As far as non-controversial activities in the area, you're probably not aware that I don't merely edit Estonian-related subjects to be controversial or anything like that. What, if anything, for example, is controversial in edits like this, which I made to Arnold Green (politician) [4]? Anti-Nationalist (talk) 20:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Your edits at Green, regarding a Soviet personality, is not an area of contention. It is where topics involve (Estonian being a target) authorities or individuals that disagree with the Soviet or official Russian positions on past or current events that give rise to conflict.  PЄTЄRS VЄСRUМВА ►talk  23:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Henrik, it is absolutely NOT on, that you fob off Sander Sade's edit summary, yet use this edit summary against User:Anti-Nationalist. I suggest that you look at the conduct of ALL editors on those articles properly, rather than fobbing off one and going after another. Also, it should be noted that the article which A-N used that edit summary on has been subjected to censorship by numerous editors, and blind freddy can see that by simply looking at the article history - look at Bakharev's re-insertion of material deleted. It is little wonder then that WP:EEML web brigadiers would accuse A-N of only introducing negative information into articles, when they are actively engaging in censorship of many articles. I was also urge you to look at the recent history of harrassment against A-N by numerous editors, of which this was just the latest attempt, again with the ridiculous rehashing of the same edit on a single article from months ago. Don't take the easy way out by only listening to WP:EEML brigadiers, but take the time to look at all of their edits. --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 13:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I have no particular sympathies towards anyone in entrenched battleground areas. (fyi, [5]). henrik•talk 13:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course, and I wasn't, nor am I, saying that you do. All I am suggesting is that one needs to look a little bit deeper than the bluster to find out what is what, and I would hope that you would do this, that is the point of what I wrote above. Cheers, --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 13:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Henrik for your note [6]. I'm not that sure what to make of it however. I did request for comments at WP:RFCN regarding Anti-Nationalist because of according to the user I was "an ally of a bunch of hardcore Eastern European nationalists". At WP:RFCN I was made clear by several editors [7][8] that I have raised the question at a wrong place and that it should be taken to WP:ANI instead. Which I did. Now several days later I get a note from [9] Sander Sade regarding the Enforcement request. After learning over there more about Anti-Nationalist editing patterns, I'm sorry but I have seen the similar pattern that's full of "nationalists" and "nazi-collabrators" on Wikipedia before, that's why I filed this. I guess the thing that I've learned during this mess is that Anti-nationalist has done nothing wrong, and in case anybody tries to insert purely sourced nazi nonsense into articles/and talks pages on wikipedia, and calls you an ally of "hardcore nationalist" meanwhile, its you who'd need apologize and move on.--Termer (talk) 02:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Henrik, I've just made a bad faith statement [10] that involves Anti-nationalist and not only. Please feel free to permanently block me from Wikipedia. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 02:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

*sigh* henrik•talk 20:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

aw come on guys, leave henrik alone, he's only trying to help! Missedwardcullen (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Page view statistics

I like your tool very much. It adds to the richness of information in wikipedia.

It would be nice if you could break down the stats by location to show which are the top one or two countries viewing a page (similar to google trends). I am not even sure if that can be done. Anyway, thanks for making wikipedia better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.90.19.124 (talk) 12:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I have a question re how the number of views is counted. If a user views the same page more than once in a day, is each view by the same user counted? Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Your message to me

It was nice to get a "thank you" note about my small editing change. I have been timid about making corrections because I don't want to change the meaning of what has been written, but I do try to make small corrections when I can. It's nice to know that someone notices the little things, so I'll keep doing so. Thanks for the encouragement! I'm just learning about "talk" and signatures, so I hope this is all right. Mmcgown (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Help I want to do something I haven't done before

Hello

I want to add a picture to an info box. The picture is on my computer and I want it to transfer it to Wikipedia.

Throughgrittedteeth

Throughgrittedteeth (talk) 17:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Help:Images may be of some assistance, have you checked it out? henrik•talk 18:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I've managed now. I hope its OK. Throughgrittedteeth (talk) 16:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Topic ban of Thomas Basboll

I have commented as linked here regarding the request by Thomas Basboll to be unbanned from editing 9/11 related articles. The discussion was only ongoing for a day before his ban was "lifted"...I suggest if possible we have further discussion regarding this matter before we remove his ban. Thanks.--MONGO 03:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The ban has not been lifted, it's been suspended for a month to evaluate what happens. henrik•talk 06:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I responded to your query at my talkpage....--MONGO 01:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

• From the editors: 250th issue of the Signpost

• Editorial: A digital restoration

• Election report: ArbCom election in full swing

• Interview: Interview with David G. Post

• News and notes: Wikipedia's death report premature, fundraiser, usability, new CSD, noms, and more

• In the news: Ron Livingston sues vandal, disclosure of IP address ordered, brief headlines

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Hi Henrik, quick question. Is there any way to generate a list for the most viewed articles in Wikipedia that is current? I have followed the link http://stats.grok.se/en/top but it seems to only generate data for 2008/08, not the current date or month. Sorry for the simple question, I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing. Thanks Antarctic-adventurer (talk) 15:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I lost the script to generate the top pages - one of these days I'll rewrite it :) henrik•talk 23:32, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

hey

hey i'm a bit confused about how you can change things without it being classed at vandalism...help me please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Missedwardcullen (talk • contribs) 19:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

also....

can i change my username? Missedwardcullen (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Where can I find the wikipedia article on traffic statistics

I love the wikipedia page statistics tool, but cannot always find it. I see references to an article about it on this talk page, but I cannot find the article. Can someone please provide a link. TIA Ottawahitech (talk) 20:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

stats.grok.se. If you look at the history tab of any page, there's a link ("Page view statistics") to the statistics page from there too. henrik•talk 21:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - when I saw the word "article" I was looking for text, I did not realize this was the same page that led me to this talk page :-)

btw I love this statistics page - any chance of seeing something similar developed for a yearly (as opposed to a monthly) view? Ottawahitech (talk) 04:49, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

My topic ban?

Hi Henrik, can you let me know when/whether I'm truly free to edit the WTC article? (See this thread to see why I ask.) I don't mind waiting. I had been planning to wait until April, after all. But if my trial period is going to demonstrate anything, I'm going to have actually do something before Jan 8, right?--Thomas B (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Unless and until you're notified otherwise, the terms of the suspension are unchanged.

A personal note of reflection though: you could most likely make your editing experience here much easier for yourself, and probably find it more enjoyable, if you would consider expanding your interest just slightly beyond the WTC and 9/11 articles. henrik•talk 21:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. And I appreciate your advice. As Mongo rightly points out, though, I'm stubborn about this. I don't want to have some generalized "street cred" to throw around. I just want to make warranted edits. If it is really true that I would have been "allowed" to do exactly and just the things I did do on the 9/11 articles if only I had also contributed to other parts of Wikipedia, well, then, I think being indefinitely topic-banned for them is absurd. Absurdity, to be sure, is not unheard of at Wikipedia. ;-) And in this case it may also explain something. I think the real barrier to progress on the articles I had been working on was the presence of people who had credibility unrelated to their knowledge of the subject and sensitivity for the issues. So people like me got forced out. And the article has made no significant progress toward GA since. So it goes.--Thomas B (talk) 22:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I imagined there was a fair bit of that involved, yeah. Quite understandable. If you look at it from my point of view for a bit: the 9/11 pages, as well as various nationalist, ethnic and religious conflict areas - basically any area mirroring a real life conflict - are constantly subject to degradation from users who are desperate to slant them to their point of view. And telling the difference between a well-meaning editor and a skilled troll is not an easy task. Sometimes we err on the wrong side. Showing that you care about other articles than just controversial topics has become a useful test for telling the type of users apart. Very few POV-pushers are willing to spend the time to do anything else rather than editing their own area of interest. Absurd? Perhaps. I'm obviously not claiming it to be a perfect, or even good, scheme: but we have yet to come up with a significantly better one. If there was no moderation, all except the angriest users who scream the loudest would soon be driven away. henrik•talk 23:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks again for taking a look. And if you do find some more straightforward way of justifying my ban (i.e., in terms of my actual behavior not my alleged motive), please let me know.--Thomas B (talk) 13:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

WP article hit counter

Well done for doing this; I find it very interesting.86.46.223.94 (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

hit counting (days lost)

In September a whole week of data (meaning the stats of hit counting for a given day, a given page) was lost. In October 3 days were lost, in November 2 days were lost. It decreases !!!! :-) It seems that wednesday 9 and thursday 10 of December are going to be lost, perhaps Friday too ... Before September there had been no losses of data for years. What did happen ???

I loved to compare the readership after a drastic change and before the change, and now I have to make additional computations to compare the readership of one month where data have been lost to another month where data are complete ... Too bad ... :-( --Chassain (talk) 00:19, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking into it; seems there's a bug in my stats collection script. henrik•talk 11:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks a lot !!--Chassain (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Alright, found and fixed a problem. The 10th should have data now and processing of the 11th is running. henrik•talk 14:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ! December 9 is lost, but 10 and and 11 are recovered, seemingly (I test it on fr:Loi normale that has 1 000 visits a day on a regular basis). I guess this must be tedious for you, so thanks for volunteering. If one writes a book or gives talks on a topic, he has some feedback on the quality of transmission of knowledge, but some fuzzy feedback. These statistics are a crystal clear feedback.--Chassain (talk) 15:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I've rerun all of December, and all of fr:Loi normale has data now, so it's hopefully fixed. Yeah, seeing that there are actually readers to the articles we write is pretty motivating for me too. That's the reason I started the stats thing in the beginning :) henrik•talk 08:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

That seem to solve the problem for English. In Norwegian (bokmål) 7th, 8th and 9th of Dec is still lacking. Will those three days get their data ? Thank you for a splendid statistics tool! Helge Høifødt (talk) 14:42, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully fixed, see above. henrik•talk 08:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree

I agree with Chassain. Too bad...And no explanation. Best regards. IP, 12 December 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.219.92 (talk) 07:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Commons page traffic

Hi! I love your tool. I just noticed, however, that when you look at anything from Commons, it malforms the link page to the page you're looking up, and it doesn't have the correct URL listed on the page. See this for example. It says (and points) to commons.m.wikipedia.org, when it is really commons.wikimedia.org. Just wanted to let you know. :-) Killiondude (talk) 07:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I just added it to the mediawiki page on Commons, so people there can enjoy it as well. :-) Killiondude (talk) 07:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, very cool. I'll see what I can do about that URL (it's also broken for all the other non-pedia sites). henrik•talk 07:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

And Wikibooks?

I see that you have only statistics for Wikipedia. What about Wikibooks? Previously there were statistics at http://wikistics.falsikon.de/latest/wikibooks/nl/ (for the Dutch version), but this site seems to have stopped in August. Are there other places were I can find statistics about Wikibooks? --Huibc (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

• Henrik is there any chance of getting the page stats to Wikiquote pages?--Oracleofottawa (talk) 06:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

• Election report: Voting closes in the Arbitration Committee Elections

• News and notes: Mapping geotagged articles language, import sources enabled, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

wiki pageviews stats (dammit.lt)

Hi Henrik,

I'd like to use these: http://dammit.lt/wikistats/ (btw, great job!)

I'm not sure the format is described anywhere... there are 4 columns in these files. second one seems to be the title page. First look like some 2-letter identifier that could be folders, to avoid dumping so many files on a single folder.

The other two, I'm not so sure. Last one looks like the access stats...

Also, are wiki articles uniquely identified by their title, or is there a better ID out there? Maybe the mysql dumps contain a unique key that people use?

Could you help?

Thanks!

ps: feel free to contact me at quesada@gmail.com

=== I'm minimizing email (can write w one hand only) so if you have something that requires a long answer, please mail me a time slot and tel. number and I'll call you. Thanks for your patience.=== Jose Quesada, PhD.

Max Planck Institute, Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition -ABC-, Lentzeallee 94, office 224, 14195 Berlin

http://www.josequesada.name/ http://twitter.com/Quesada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.128.217 (talk) 13:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jose - a few replies.

• The format of these files are as follows: <project> <page name> <access count number> <transfer size in bytes>
• Page title uniquely identifies a page (no two pages can have the same title). Note that redirects exist however, soft links from one title to another.

henrik•talk 13:17, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Page stats

Hey there. I had a rather large suggestion to make for your page view statistics tool. The current system works on for finding the number of times a specific link has been used. Instead, this should account for the number of times the article article has been viewed, this means including redirects for the page stats. Is this possible? It would make the stat tool much much more accurate if this was incorporated. Get back to me on my talk page when you get a chance. Happy edits and holidays, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 07:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Sir: I cannot manage very well with this. The only thing I want to say is that it is a pity that a Enciclopedia made by people and for the people have problems as to delete entrances for considerations I believe not accurate. Any, poet, painter, writer, music, artist of any kind must have space in a ciber Enciclopedia. It is most useful and perfect to find information. I am afraid that I do not do it well but I do not know how to say it to make me understand. Thank you. Daniel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.216.160.87 (talk) 18:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

• Election report: ArbCom election result announced

• News and notes: Fundraiser update, milestones and more

• In the news: Accusation of bias, misreported death, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats missing for July 08

I'm not sure if you know about this already, but the site doesn't have data from July 13, 2008 to the end of the month. For example, see http://stats.grok.se/en/200807/Michael%20Jackson (although you'll see the same for any article). Great site, by the way; my bot's been using it to scrape pageviews. Shubinator (talk) 14:55, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

A Nobody^{My talk} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

copy of deleted: tbamud

Henrik, thanks for helping out those new to Wikipedia. My article was deleted and I would greatly appreciate a copy and advice.

Unfortunately someone created the tbaMUD article 2 years ago and did it improperly so it was deleted (as it should have been). I decided to recreate it and mirrored it off exsting Wiki entries of similar MUD codebases CircleMUD DikuMUD etc. It was immediately deleted saying it was a recreation of something that was already deleted.... This after spending several hours writing and referencing it properly. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, and happy holidays.

Nate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Winters (talk • contribs) 16:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

SoWhy has helped already, I see. :) henrik•talk 19:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Data archives

Hello

Is it possible to obtain all raw historical data from Wikistats?

That is, the data used to generate http://stats.grok.se/

The archive appears to only include data for 3 months in 2009?

Thanks

Charles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.37.100 (talk) 02:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

sock-puppet

That IP editor in the article for the Battle of Thermopylae is a sock-puppet who keeps evading his bans and blocks. Can you do something about him? If you check his 3-4 previous IP they have all been banned for sock-puppetry of some guy Orijentolog who's banned. Simanos (talk) 18:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

It seems Nev1 and Dougweller are on the case already, and there hasn't been any activity for a over a week. If he returns, you can drop a note at their or mine talk. henrik•talk 19:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

• News and notes: Flagged revisions petitions, image donations, brief news

• In the news: Criticism from climate change sceptic, decade in review

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Brews ohare at AE

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Brews ohare is getting out of hand. The only questions to be decided at AE, based on Brews' arbitration sanctions, are:

1. Is the article that Brews edited (indeed, created) physics-related, and therefore within his topic ban? (This is the only question that the request for enforcement raised.)
2. Was Brews' editing of the article and talk page discussion disruptive or tendentious? (Brews' detractors added this issue after the answer to the first question became so clear.)

The answer to both questions is, No. However, discussion has spiraled off in other directions. There is now a debate between pure mathematicians and applied mathematicians (those who use the math, such engineers and physicists) about the article's approach; the mathematicians actually disdain the use of sources, among other differences. And this has degenerated into name-calling and questioning one another's good faith and motives. David Tombe's arguments in Brews' support are not helping Brews or the process: Tombe was sanctioned in the same arbitration as Brews (which diminishes his credibility) and his manner is combative. Could you please step in to take control of this melee? Thank you.—Finell 05:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Right after I posted this here, I realized that I had no way of knowing when you might see it. Therefore, I made the same request (not just directed to you) at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests#Brews ohare at AE.—Finell 05:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's about par for the course. AE requests getting out of hand is more the rule than the exception. :-) henrik•talk 10:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.—Finell 17:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your quick and preemptive action on the morning of 31 December, the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Nine, I award you this barnstar. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 11:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

yay! Thank you. :) henrik•talk 11:55, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Your logic and courtesy as shown here (thanks for that) are well appreciated. And even though I myself felt the survival of the article was slim (encouraging the author to seek userfication even as I was working to improve it), I was drawn into the article's defense primarily over the responses and actions of one of the disussion's participants toward the newcomer. While one might disagree with another's opinion, the injudicious striking out of entire swaths of another's comments as was done here and again here is entirely unacceptable... and approaches actionable. I hope your your caution toward civility here will be accepted in the good faith in which it was intended and not fall of deaf ears. I am wonder though if it would it be appropriate, even though the discussion is closed, to ask that the first set of improperly struck comments [11] be also unstruck? I failed to do undo that damage before the discussion was closed, and would hate it if anyone visiting the discussion in the future might see the strike-through and then themselves conclude that censorship of another's polite and good faith comments is allowable. Again, thank you and best regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 14:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't notice that he did it twice (probably a good thing for him) - as you said, that is entirely unacceptable, and I just left another message saying so. It seems he's a bit overly enthusiastic about enforcing our rules. (I think that's not an uncommon trait among young people who's just learnt our myriad of rules). Hopefully he can be persuaded to calm down a bit. I reverted the strike out on the afd, but it would have been perfectly fine if you'd done it yourself too. henrik•talk 15:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For the above-listed effforts toward encouraging peace and community, I am honored to award you this Barnstar of Diplomacy. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 14:32, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, shiny! Two barnstars in one day? The Gods must be pleased. :) henrik•talk 15:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, if they're not, your courtesy toward a newcomer was definitely appreciated by me. Happy New Year, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, thanks from me as well. I saw the strikethrough, but the cause didn't occur to me. I hope I was civil enough... NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 06:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Your help with Guitaret article

Hi Henrik Thanks for you help on the Guitaret article. Unfortunately MisterWiki pretty much ignored you and deleted it all again. Now it's locked, so I don't know what to do next. I replied to you on my page, but I have no idea how this all works, so I am replying here as well. I was going ot make a few more pages on related matters, but right now I really have no interest in writing pages just so a schoolboy on the other side of the planet can decide they are not interesting and delete them. And clues what I should do? DiarmuidPigott (talk) 14:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Are you the one who authored this?

If so good job. I hope it continues and you work any problems out of the BETA. Dr CareBear (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Strange Java

Hi, I recently added a talk page message and it seems to have added an odd piece of javascript that references your account. Do you have any idea why this might be? Here's the diff [12]--Torchwood Who? (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Huh? I have no idea why that would show up there. Are you using any of my scripts, or is some other tool referencing that file? henrik•talk 12:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

afc-helper

A User on the helpdesk reported [13]. This is caused by the usage of document.write() in scripts to load other scripts. This is problematic, because document.write() writes to an arbitrary position. It should never be used in scripts that are not inline scripts. I made this change to solve that problem. This solved the issue for the user. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:08, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Aha! Many thanks! The JS I wrote here has been sadly neglected, I was about to delete it entirely. :) henrik•talk 17:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

stats.grok.se

Your article traffic stats program is brilliant, but it needs a tiny update. 2010 isn't on the drop-down list of months yet and, although the page opens up with the data for this month, the user cannot get back to that information having chosen a different month. --Stemonitis (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

My topic ban, again

Hi Henrik, Happy New Year! As you suggested, I posted a request to evaluate the results of your suspension of the topic ban at AE, but Roger Davies aksed me to post it under ArbCom amendments. It can be found here. Thanks again for your help.--Thomas B (talk) 11:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Appeal

I have filed an appeal: [14]. Offliner (talk) 19:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)