User talk:A. B.: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
no worries
Nat (talk | contribs)
12,394 edits
{{subst:User:Nat/Lest we forget}}
Line 147: Line 147:
==Old business==
==Old business==
Oh I knew I was responding to comments by an anon editor, not you, so no worries! I probably should have replied on their talk page, or better yet not at all. But live and learn. Hope all is well! [[User:Pfly|Pfly]] 22:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh I knew I was responding to comments by an anon editor, not you, so no worries! I probably should have replied on their talk page, or better yet not at all. But live and learn. Hope all is well! [[User:Pfly|Pfly]] 22:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

==In Remembrance...==
<imagemap> Image:Lest We Forget.png|450px|left
rect 1 1 1027 747 [[Remembrance Day]]
desc none </imagemap><br clear=all>
--[[user:Nat|'''nat''']] <sup>[[user talk:Nat|'''Alo!''']] <span class="plainlinks">[irc://irc.freenode.net/UserNat,isnick '''Salut!''']</span> [[Special:Blockip/Nat|'''Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!''']]</sup> 02:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:53, 6 November 2007

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:A._B..


Welcome to my talk page. If you leave a message here, I will respond here to avoid fragmenting our discussion.


A quiz

Spammers, friends and critics can't agree -- is User:A. B.:

A. "She (because clearly she's a bitch) is just doing her thing up in New Jersey. No one likes you, mother of three. No one." [1]
B. "Worst of all this user is very offensive to females." [2]
C. A stalker "from birmgingham england." [4]
D. A "robot." [5][6]
E. Hiding a pornographic fire-parrot in Wikipedia's sandbox?[7]
F. Living in Minnesota, USA.[8] ... or maybe Tennessee?[9]
G. All of the above.
H. None of the above.
I. Somedays one, somedays another

You decide.
--A. B. (talk) 17:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklist

Is it me or does the one here operate completely differently to Meta. There is no "logging" - I assume you would agree there should be - and random admins seem to wander in, add something that isn't listed (with no explanation) and ignore the backlog?

I've closed some delist ones and arc'd some stuff. I wonder if promoting/pushing/enforcing some guidelines/policy would help. I'll happily chip in and I am watching that & related pages closely now so I'd be better able to support, cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's chaotic here and that will come back to haunt us when we get whitelist requests in a year or two.
I think we can't force anything on random admins -- it's an occasional problem on meta too.
Thanks for you help here. I suppose those things you did is stuff I could have done myself; I unthinkingly assumed it was admin turf. --A. B. (talk) 15:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we start "logging" ones that are done (if/when) and "nicely" point out to admins that we would appreciate it if....?
Meta isn't bad and I'd would have a word if I saw really unlogged listings often.
And the times I need to remind myself - "It's a wiki, I can do anything"!!
I'm sure we can make it better, bit by bit --Herby talk thyme 15:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Plus MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/log and [10] - it's a start, --Herby talk thyme 15:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Realised it should actually be here per Meta but that must be cascade protected as it won't let me move it - so if we ever find an admin.... --Herby talk thyme 15:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Watching" threads

x post A. B. & SiobhanHansa

Don't know how you folk keep an eye on actual threads on pages here but you may care to take a look at this. It shows you the most recent post on a thread and clicking takes you to the section. I got hooked on Commons first and would be without it now. If it is useful, fine & share it (& let me know if it misses anything you would want). If not ne'er mind! Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very powerful tool. Thanks for showing me! --A. B. (talk) 15:06, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, the one on Meta is useful too - I may create a spam list only one there when I get a moment, I'll let you have the link when I do --Herby talk thyme 15:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact me regarding "Notability" on NetQoS

Hi. My name's Brian Boyko - I'm the new media communication specialist at NetQoS, and just noticed that you added a "notability" tag to the Wikipedia page describing my company.

NetQoS is notable in our field, but I'd like to know how to go about showing it to you to your satisfaction. Please feel free to email me at brian.boyko@netqos.com - I figure that once I show you a few articles from mainstream press about our company, and if you're satisfied with the notability of the company you can remove the tag if you wish.

Thank you, Brian Boyko —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.129.167.114 (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great -- just list the links here and I'll be happy to take a look at them. --A. B. (talk) 20:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Logging

I'll assume you are watching my talk! Anything we can do to make it easier? We both know what a pain it is if the log is not done when there is an appeal (& the page gets to 100K). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 12:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts on this? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No thoughts right now other than logging is a must to prvent chaos down the road. Thanks for nagging. I'll start thinking. --A. B. (talk) 17:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If I may make an observation, the whole logging thing looks extremely complicated. I appreciate it's useful, but I think it needs much clearer instructions, or a more transparent method (though I'll take your word that meta has determined this to be the best way). As BozMo mentioned, it needs to be obvious to passing admins, not just those with years of familiarity with the meta method. Also re your other comment above, the log is in MediaWiki_talk space, because if it was in MediaWiki space only admins could edit it (I think). -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok we can talk here! My "years" of familiarity on meta are three months and I picked the method up after about four attempts :) - it is needed believe me. Someone will come along and ask and if the admin dealing with the request can find nothing there will be no legs to stand on! If there is a better way - great and actually A. B.'s is probably more experienced than I am so thoughts welcome but dealing with "appealing" (I use the word loosely) spammers takes all the evidence you can get. You (zzuuzz) are quite right - the log should be here (per Meta) but I can't move it cos I'm not an admin... --Herby talk thyme 17:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hope A. B. doesn't mind being bugged by the new message bar ;) Maybe you misunderstand what I said. The logging should be in talk space so that anyone can help with it (my opinion). As I said, I know the logging will be helpful, but I think it needs clearer instructions so that admins can do it on their first visit to the page. Maybe it will become clearer as the log fills up with examples, but I still think the instructions are not as clear, or as bolded as they should be. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's one of the good guys, he'll be fine! I agree actually with the talk space aspect (semi prot tho IMO??). I'm out of time today but I'll see what I can do to improve/simplify the process tomorrow. I think it is basically a good way of doing it (& as it was a steward's idea I thought I ought to follow it:)). Thanks for the input --Herby talk thyme 18:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your link additions to Template:Spamlink

Some warnings ..

Dirk Beetstra T C has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

(AntiSpamBot is still shadowbot on IRC). Thanks for the additions, most useful, keep up the good work! --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your email

I received your email. I had begun to suspect the same thing some time back but lacked evidence. I will be watching a little more closely from now on and will block the account the moment something untoward is uncovered. If you knew of this editor, you'd also know that such behvaiour is possible and also very likely. -- Longhair\talk 20:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasel Safwan

Hi. Since you left your delete comment, I have added links in the article to a couple of newspaper articles about the artist. --A. B. (talk) 20:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you characterized my message above as "canvassing".[11] Just so I understand you correctly, are you implying this message was inappropriate per WP:CANVASS? FWIW, you are the only person I left such a message for. Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 18:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, bad word choice on my part. I have struck out "canvassed" and replaced it with "solicited". I would agree that you did not violate WP:CANVASS. Stifle (talk) 18:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks! I just wanted to get as high quality a discussion as possible and your second review (even though I disagree with your comment on threshold circulations) takes us closer to that goal. As for Mr. Safwan, I don't really care -- whichever side of the notability line he's on, it's a close call. --A. B. (talk) 18:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

Oh I knew I was responding to comments by an anon editor, not you, so no worries! I probably should have replied on their talk page, or better yet not at all. But live and learn. Hope all is well! Pfly 22:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

Remembrance Day


--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 02:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A._B.&oldid=169522941"