User talk:Lar: 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
Irpen (talk | contribs)
32,604 edits
Your unblocking of Dino
Line 1,005: Line 1,005:


''Some things'', yes. But again, what in ''that'' particular incident required the IRC confidentiality? We see the damage from its having been on IRC instead of ANI. What's the benefit of that? --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 22:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
''Some things'', yes. But again, what in ''that'' particular incident required the IRC confidentiality? We see the damage from its having been on IRC instead of ANI. What's the benefit of that? --[[User:Irpen|Irpen]] 22:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

== Your unblocking of Dino ==

Hello,

Are you aware that you helped unblock a user, [[User:DeanHinnen|Dino]], who claimed that he contacted the author of a particularly contentious article, and then claimed that this author said that he never wrote said article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Carolyn-WMF&diff=prev&oldid=100953407 here] (when he did write the article - and it's even archived on his website!) - and based on this info, a Wiki Foundation employee (who is not an especially active editor) [[User:Carolyn-WMF]] edited a contested article and removed critical material based on these false claims by [[User:DeanHinnen|Dino]]? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Free_Republic/Archive6#The_Bryan_Affair proof here] I look forward to a complete investigation of this matter, and find the utter unresponsiveness of this WMF employee and another Foundation member, [[User:Danny|Danny Wool]], when questioned about this matter by two Admins and two editors more than a little troubling. New ANI investigation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User_Dino.27s_troubling_past_actions here] - - [[User:Fairness And Accuracy For All|Fairness & Accuracy For All]]

Revision as of 01:26, 26 January 2007

   
About Me 		       
Essays 		       
Trinkets 		       
Trivia 		       
Visited 		       
Talk 		     


I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.


Here about accountability? see my accountability page.

Attention!- We need more happiness around here. If you can make someone laugh, even a little, you've improved the Wikipedia community. Don't just be civil, be forward. Congratulate people when they do a good job, no matter what it is. Too many people have left Wikipedia—let's not let the rest go, too.



Note:

Interpersonal communication does not work when messages are left on individual users' talk pages rather than threaded, especially when a third party wishes to read or reply.

Being a "bear of very little brain", I get confused easily trying to follow conversations that bounce back and forth, so I've decided to try the convention that many others seem to use, aggregation of messages on either your talk page or my talk page. If the conversation is about an article I will try to aggregate on the article's talk page.

  • If the conversation is on your talk page or an article talk page, I will watch it.
  • If the conversation is on my talk page or an article talk page and I think that you may not be watching it, I will link to it in a note on your talk page, or in the edit summary of an empty edit. But if you start a thread here, please watch it.

I may mess up, don't worry, I'll find it eventually.

My real name is Larry Pieniazek and I like LEGO(r) Brand building elements. Feel free to mail me with comments or concerns. I will archive this page if/when there is a need but will not delete comments. I reserve the right to refactor by moving comments under headings, adding headings, and so forth but will never change comment order in a way that changes meaning.

Note: I archive off RfA thank yous separately, I think they're neat!

Archives

Talk Page Archives
My post 2012 archived talk
Archive 79 1 December 2012 through 1 December 2013
Archive 80 1 December 2013 through 1 December 2016
Archive 81 1 December 2016 through 1 December 2018
Archive 82 1 December 2018 through 1 January 2021
Archive 83 1 January 2021 through 1 January 2023
Archive 84 1 January 2023 through 1 January 2025 ??
RfA Thank Yous
RFA Archive Howcheng (27 Dec 2005) through present
All dates approximate, conversations organised by thread start date


Trentino-South Tyrol

Hi Lar, I'm just curious, how's the progress on the Trentino-South Tyrol mediation? Best regards, Markussep 20:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

not good! I need to buckle down and do all the reading needed. I do mean to do some work on this but have not made enough progress to even summarise the issues yet. Sorry for the delay. ++Lar: t/c 20:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fast reply! If you need some help just let me know. Things seem pretty quiet around South Tyrol lately, apart from the occasional vandals who remove either the Italian or the German names from the articles. Markussep 20:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I could definitely use some help. If you're ever on IRC maybe we could plan out how best to do that. ++Lar: t/c 12:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IRC 'fraid not, I'm pretty busy in the real world, so I'd rather just discuss ideas on your or my talk pages. IMO we can split the topic into three main issues: how to name the region, how to name the province/area, and how to name places/objects in the province. For the former 2 there could be sufficient usage in English, which is the most relevant IMO. For the places/objects I think the solution found at Talk:Communes of South Tyrol is a good starting point, might need some fine tuning. Do you know which naming conventions apply here? Markussep 16:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, those three areas of division on the issues sound good. I don't yet have a clear understanding of which naming conventions do apply. thanks for your help... ++Lar: t/c 17:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The most interesting guideline for this topic is this one IMO: Wikipedia:Naming conflict. Some applicable naming conventions etc.:

For what it's worth, I did some of the tests described in Wikipedia:Naming_conflict#Identification_of_common_names_using_external_references for the region and the province:

I'd say that there is clear common usage for Trentino-Alto Adige, but for the province it's less clear. Markussep 19:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From ani

(Copied from ani) User 152.91.9.144, I'm not sure that I understand why you have created two sections here, or why you reordered the comments, repeatedly, in the previous section, or why you're taking quite such a strident tone. It may be best to present the facts dispassionately and succinctly and let the facts speak for themselves. Since those facts ARE presented, the best thing to do now is stop completely. ++Lar: t/c 04:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lar. Just a couple of things:
  • I created the second section because I was told to create a new section. ANI moves very fast and sometimes things get overlooked, and I attempted to simply move the old discussion down to get some further attention. I replaced it exactly once. I didn't create the other section, Trodel did.
  • I'm not sure what you mean by "re-ordering comments." The only changes to an individual comment I made were to indent P's replies, and the copy-paste to lower on the noticeboard.
  • I'm trying to maintain good humour at being told my tone is "strident."
    • After recieving a week-long block without warning for participating in uncontroversial discussion on ani, I complained not one whit outside my talk page.
    • I placed exactly one quite civil reply on P's talk, explaining how her "get the facts straight" comment to me was quite incorrect. (Mea cupla: The wiktionary link was uncalled for on my part.)
    • P's hostile and inconsistant replies about "whining" seem to pass without notice?
  • Only when evidence of further blocks well outside normal practice were raised did I say anything.
  • You may have noticed that I _have_ stopped completely, after presenting the facts and what I'd like to see happen.
I've always taken you to be an even-handed and egalitarian adminstrator, and am somewhat suprised to see you giving tacit support here. Have you actually looked at the two blocks-without-warning that I was concerned about?
152.91.9.144 05:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geez. Did it ever occur to you that I saw that another admin had fixed the mistake? That there was another anon at the same time who was trolling (pretending to be Jimbo in fact) who the block was meant for? The other admin fixed it, you did not suffer a unjustified weeks block, and I saw that it had been fixed and saw you hadn't commented so if you were so peeved by it, you should have said something so I could explain the situation. As it was, you didn't seem to care. Stalking me for weeks afterwards and this continual harassment on your part is an unacceptable behaviour considering the mistake was fixed!. And the blocks without warning was the same person jumping IPs and making the same edit. I have explained that at least 5 times and you continue ignore it. You were indeed to told to make a new section, about the NYeditor block only, not to rehash every flipping thing that had already been discussed, yet you had to start it all over again. Your constant assumptions of bad faith about my actions have been enormous and unjustified. And yes, after you continue to ignore explanations and harass me, I'm not going to be sticky sweet friendly with you, nor am I required to be.pschemp | talk 07:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep this short, as it's innappropiate to have it out on someone else's talk:
  • When I "said something" to pschemp regarding my block, she removed it without comment,
  • A single back-and-forth on ani is hardly "Stalking" or "continual harassment,"
  • I'm not assuming bad faith, simply saying that pschemp's blocks for "trolling" are questionable judgment.
I'll not reply to any further posts from pschemp on this page, it's Lar's talk, this IP has it's own talk page if pschemp want to communicate with me.
152.91.9.144 22:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If its inappropriate, then why did you post here to begin with? Perhaps because no one else agrees with you and you are still trying to harass me? I have a right to defend myself against your false accusations about my behaviour. pschemp | talk 23:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I can help resolve this I am happy to have my talk page used this way. But I'm not sure there is much more to say... Pschemp called this one correctly in my view. Although her bedside manner may leave something to be desired, she's right. ++Lar: t/c 00:22, 1 December 2006

I left a note on pschemp's talk that I was happy to leave this, but by her posting here after that note I'll take that as an indication that something useful might come of further talk. Part of the problem has arisen because the discussions to date have been vauge, somewhat overheated, and "help" from LightWhatsis has further clouded the issue. If will try to be really clear in what I'm referring to.
Lar - Which block is "this one" that you're talking about? This IP or NYScholar's?
pschemp -
  1. I posted here because I respect Lar's opinion and I wanted to get it. I wasn't having much luck in getting focused discourse anywhere else.
  2. I'd suggest that "no one else agrees with [me]" because we haven't had focused discourse.
  3. Statements like "trying to harass me" and "false accusations" aren't helpful.
As I said on ANI, I've looked over most of pschemp's blocks for the last month, and they are plentiful and in the largest majority correct. The two that could have been handled better were the aformentioned NYScholar and the one on this IP.
NYScholar (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
Here are the edits that this user was blocked for: [1]. There was no warning, and there is nothing there even remotely within the realm of "trolling." While I'm aware that block was reviewed by one admin, getting two people to agree isn't enough to make something correct. Redvers' rational of "half a dozen edits to one user's talk page" seems quite weak, when we consider that here pschemp took four edits to make one comment and here she took two more. That's "half a dozen" and these edits to this talk page and are as much "flaming" as this one by NYScholar.
152.91.9.144 (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)
This one is wrapped up pretty well here.
I'd prefer not to drag this bit of Wiki-drama out, but I'll quote a section from Blocking policy: "Disruption" blah blah blah "severely disrupts" yadda yadda "very controversial" blah blag "note the case on WP:ANI." You get the drift.
152.91.9.144 01:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Incredibly you are still at it. The NYScholar block was reviewed by 3 other admins (two of whom are b'crats too) and agreed with. So move on. Your block was already explained in this very thread as a mistake. Plus, it was fixed. Get over it. pschemp | talk 15:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"This one" means this situation, specifically her interactions with you. You're giving the appearance of not being willing to let this go. If a block is a good block, it doesn't get overturnd on review, typically, and if it isn't, it does. Pschemp gets blocks overturned from time to time. That doesn't make her a bad admin. I get blocks overturned from time to time, and it doesn't make me a bad admin either. Your response is disproportionate to the issue and she's calling you on it. That's what I mean about "this one". Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 12:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DRV

Could you please have a look here, once again – and reconsider your stance? Ref – Ice Age (band). — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 05:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked again. Badlydrawnjeff has it right. Kansas was a 70's supergroup. They are hugely notable and they make the label clearly notable (and major enough to count by our rules) by their presence. That means the band is too. Each link reduces strength, to be sure, and this band is two links away from Kansas but Kansas is so HUGE that it works, by our rules. I'm sorry but I'd let this one go, now that the label had more info added. Your initial close wasn't wrong, trust me. But it's a good overturn, in my view. Of course I'm rather inclusionist you know :) ++Lar: t/c 12:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date linking

Hi. I wondered if you would be interested in contributing to User talk:Guinnog/date linking? --Guinnog 18:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem administator

It looks as if we have a rogue administrator with User:Chowbok who is routinely tagging official images of state governors, including Jennifer Granholm. See Image_talk:Jennifer_Granholm.jpg for more info. Steelbeard1 03:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The english Wikipedia has gotten much more stringent about fair use images lately. Chowbok's actions are in line with the latest thinking on when it is ok to use fair use images. (Jimbo himself has also commented saying that if an image can be replaced, it should be removed... in part as a way to spur replacement). I have seen that Chowbok's actions have been questioned in other cases, on the admin noticeboard, and while some fault the wording, there has been general acceptance of the approach. I see that you've sent a note to the governor's office, using the boilerplate that is recommended we use to seek permission, which is an excellent approach to resolving the issue, so thanks for taking the initiative on that. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 05:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD unnecessarily reopened

An anon has reopened an AfD here that did not need reopening. Since I have a conflict of interest, could you do what needs to be done? Thanks. Samsara (talk • contribs) 00:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the air when you left this message I think... it looks to me like the needful has been done, it appears closed again... Please advise if I can still be of help though... ++Lar: t/c 04:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry for not updating this post. My efforts got sucked into dealing with what turned out to be a sockpuppeteer, and having to smoothe community relations afterwards. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 04:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems I only just missed you when I posted this. I was trying to find someone who was actually online at the time (not realising it was already on ANI since I avoid that place). Samsara (talk • contribs) 04:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. ++Lar: t/c 06:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Negative vote

Thanks for your question. I tried to clarify a bit on the voting page, and I have been working on a user discussion page: User:Jd2718/jd2718_ArbCom_notes where I added a line or two. Jd2718 12:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steward election summary

m:User:Gurch/StewardElections – Gurch 02:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching

Hi Lar! I see on Wikipedia:Esperanza/Admin coaching/Status that you don't have a student right now. Is this correct? If so, would you like a student? I am trying to match people at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Admin coaching with coaches. If you'd like a student, I would place you with User:Akradecki. Please let me know. Thanks! --Fang Aili talk 17:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fang... In the past I've been working with Petros471. I think there is great value in paired coaches. Petros came at things from more of a vandal fighter perspective and I was more from policy and blocking. Do you think I could pair with someone to coach, perhaps? Let me know. PS thanks for filling in on coordinating! ++Lar: t/c 18:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If there's any way I can help, let me know. I am a bit of a vandal fighter myself and maybe if Petros is busy I could sub in for him. Best wishes --Guinnog 18:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent -- thanks for volunteering, Guinnog. I have placed you both with User:Akradecki. Please contact him to get started. Thank you both! --Fang Aili talk 18:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stewards elections

refactored to Chacor

Ref conv

Sorry for the downtime. References converter is now back up and running. About a week ago the hard drive in my server crashed. Luckily it stayed together long enough to allow me to pull all the data off onto a new hard drive, but I still had to go through the process of installing Linux on the new hard drive, installing all the necessary programs, and loading in all of the old data from the server. I got all of my essential services up within two days (CVS, Apache, Wiki), but I kind of forgot about web scripts, which I finally got around to fixing today. Everything should be fully functional again. If you see any bugs, just send me a message. You are receiving this message because you are on the spamlist. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, simply remove your name. --Cyde Weys 19:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steward election

Lar, I've got your yesterday's email, the first one I've ever got from you, and I replied to you at once. I gather from your second mail that you did not get my reply. I don't know what happened with my response. Maybe your spam filter is too aggressive. I have resent it. --Irpen 19:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have received the second one and replied. I have no idea what happened with the first one, but I'm glad that it seems to be sorted. As I said in my reply, I'm happy to discuss further with you in any venue you like... just let me know where. ++Lar: t/c 19:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me then, if the discussion will not be going in endless circles. As I wrote you, public discussions are preferred because they result in accountability. Something that is absent with the discussions held off-record, whose results are implemented on-wiki.

Now, to the point. I do recognize that there may be a legitimate need to discuss certain Wikipedia issues privately. There may also be a legitimate need to contact someone live, which often means IRC. I understand that. If the Willey-like mass move vandalism is going on, it is totally understandable that the editor who spotted it looks for the fastest way possible to contact an admin who would issue an emergency block. I don't think there ever was a controversy or lack of consensus on such IRC "discussions". The same way there may be exceptional cases where the discussion involves private or personal matters, personal info pasted to Wikipedia, issues related to minors, serious threats, etc. I am not talking about such cases.

You certainly realize that many editors, and I am among them, question an ethicallity of IRC plotting of the onwiki activity when it is unrelated to any of the emergency cases discussed above. One of such things is non-emergency blocks, for instance a "punishment" block for what may seem to some as incivility outburst. Discussion over IRC whether the block is appropriate are off-record and then a limited group of editors privately decides how to act. In my opinion, even picking a specific admin to bring up specific beef one has against some user and contacting such an admin publicly at his Wikipedia talk page is tantamount to court shopping. Issues should be brought to the general public boards such as WP:ANI, WP:PAIN. This is where the consensus regarding the preferable way of action is formed and implemented.

There is enough evidence that there is plenty of back-stage activity going on at IRC. The more harmless example was the appearance of Cowman109's masterpiece called Wikipedia:Administrators are not here to build the encyclopedia (later moved to a different name but still ridiculous). Much more alarming are editor's blocks with "I discussed this at IRC" justification to show some sort of "consensus". You certainly know of such blocks. I do not want to go into details here unless you insist.

Also, vote canvassing, even an open one on the user talk pages, is generally frown upon. Of course the private canvassing at IRC is even more unethical. I happen to notice instantaneous activation of the same groups of people whether one user seems to be failing the ArbCom nomination or when the oppose votes started to mount at your stewardship nomination. Out of nowhere, the threaded comments by the familiar users started to pop up at the voting page. I wonder how soon after I post this, the IRC discussion will commence.

Anyway, I view this an ethics issue. Stewardship gives the checkuser rights, the most sensitive privilege here because it could make possible to connect usernames not only with names, but locations, workplaces, schools and even home addresses. I would like to be sure that such rights are given only to users about whom any ethics questions were not even asked. The cases of Checkuser abuse by one user who lost the access (user is still on IRC all right) is the case in point.

I am not saying you are a bad editor or even a bad admin, although I strongly disapprove your preference of discussion of admin-related matters along the untraceable channels. But I cannot support giving the checkuser rights to you in the view of above.

Please do not take it personally. I did not even want to elaborate but it was you who insisted that I explain my position. --Irpen 10:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback. I don't take it personally and I appreciate your candor. I strongly agree with the notion that IRC should not be a substitute for on-wiki consensus. Consensus is a foundational principle of our project and should not be circumvented. Where I think we differ is with the notion that all discussion, all communication should be on-wiki and traceable. I think that has a stifling effect, in fact, just as much or more as too much secrecy does. Some things should remain private. ++Lar: t/c 16:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, some things should remain private but communications about non-emergency blocks which you seem to view as the acceptable topic for IRC discussions are not among things to be private. I always called for a greater transparency. Transprarency is not the same as revealing everything to everyone. If the issue requires discussing the checkuser data, keep it at private channels. If someome advises someone else to block an editor, this should be done publicly for better accountability. Then everyone would have to stand up to their decisions, make sure explanations are visible and open to comments and the actions are implemented by the decision makers themselves rather through inciting others to act as their proxies and then, with no trace, there is no way to attribute the actions and opinions. "I consulted with others on IRC and decided to block the editor" is the best example of abuse. I am aware that IRC fairies strongly disagree. I am surprised that the usual suspects have not yet commented here. I am sure I angered some and this was not my intentions. Anyway, I am sure this thread is being discussed.

Anyway, I try to stay out of the policy pages because of those games and IRC spills over to the Wikipedia edit space. I almost don't attend the Wikipedia space unless forced to by the extreme curcumstances. Voting however, is the rare instance where the input may matter (but not always so as the Carnildo promotion after some private discussions have shown.)

I have nothing personally against you but I based my vote on my perception of what's damaging the Wikipedia. I did not want to comment any further and did so here only because you strongly asked me to elaborate. --Irpen 20:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your original oppose had some unsubstantiated statements. I'm still not seeing specific incidents ("his several actions at enwiki raised legitimate questions for which no satisfactory answers were given".. what actions? what questions? where were satisfactory answers not given? ) so that oppose remains unsubstantiated as far as I am concerned, but the reason for your opposition is clearer now than it was then, for which I thank you. I do not expect I am going to change your mind, or that of Giano, Bishonen, Geogre or Ghirlandajo, honestly, because we appear to have some philosophical differences about approaches to creating this encyclopedia, and about what behaviours are acceptable and what behaviours are not, that go deeper than just IRC. Which is OK, the process is working as it should, and you all should feel free to continue to canvass against me, without guilt, if you feel the need.
I do however want to respond to this point... your example phrasing "I consulted with others on IRC and decided to block the editor", is in my view, if given as the sole reason for a block on AN/I or wherever, totally unacceptable as a reason for a block. Blocking should be transparent. I have put every one of my blocks (other than obvious vandalism blocks where there were no contributions other than vandalism) up for review at AN/I, and given detailed justification (I've been faulted for being too detailed, in fact) including diffs, that showed the behavior that justified the block. How the matter was first determined to be an issue (IRC, an email, an IM on a third service, a post to a talk page, a post to an incident page... I've acted because of all of those things) really is not relevant to how the matter should be decided and documented. I guess my issue with your oppose is that you give the appearance of lumping all IRC together into one thing, and I reject that notion. IRC is valuable in certain contexts, and you have acknowledged that. I challenge you to find a block of mine that I justified with "This was decided on IRC" rather than with an explanation and diffs. In fact I'm not sure that justification is all that prevalent among any admins, including those that some disparage as IRC Fairies (a rather snide comment, wouldn't you agree?). Do you have specific examples of such justifications? ++Lar: t/c 20:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and note that I avoided resurrecting the issue because it seemed to me you knew exactly what I was talking about and I thought this was enough. Since you keep pressuring, I am forced to be more explicit. I raised the issue at one time here. No answer was given and at the time I decided to rather drop it because it was too loosely related to the specific matter on hand. I haven't ever seen a direct answer to this neither from you, nor from Kylu. Here we have a case when we can never fully know what happened precisely because the discussion that does not warrant privacy took place over IRC. --Irpen 21:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I beg your pardon Lar? Did I read that correctly? " we appear to have some philosophical differences about approaches to creating this encyclopedia" You bet we have some "philosophical differences" - We write it, you pontificate about it! Giano 22:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image for Barman banner

There is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Batman looking to find an image for their banner, which I don't think they've created yet. They're not sure whether they should ask to use the Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics banner as a sub-group or not, but the one thing I am sure is that Image:TIA 2006ToyFair LEGO Batman Promo Dscn7058a.jpg is probably just about the only public domain image I can find that might be relevant. Considering you created the picture, I was wondering if you would know how to crop the external imagery to keep only the Batman character in the picture. I know that I personally have absolutely no ability in this regard, but have an impression you might. In any event, thanks for the attention. Badbilltucker 21:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any image certainly can be cropped. There may be more to it than that though. I can pop by the project and solicit what they want to do and see how I can help. ++Lar: t/c 21:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this one DYN worthy?

*emabarr-sesed cough* - brenneman 06:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe DYK worthy but DYN? NE-ver! Seriously, it easily qualifies, is high quality work in my view, and would get selected by me if I were picking and there weren't better earlier ones. Needs a hook... and it would be nice if it had an illustration, can you scare one up? Make a drawing? Nominate it if you haven't already. (I just got up, haven't checked yet) ++Lar: t/c 13:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll dust off the pen and ink tomorrow after work to make an image, and then I'll, ugh, nominate. Which means I have to read the instructions, I suppose. Hopefully not too Byzantine. - brenneman 14:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Titoxd beat you to it, it's already nommed. Nice collaboration. Needs pics though. Lots of pics. Check that site you were going to write an article on? Maybe they have something? ++Lar: t/c 14:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just dropping off a thanks for the DYK notice! Oh, I saw that article on Emily Helen Butterfield before it was DYK'd. Epousesquecido seems to have picked up on Wikipedia quickly, I hope he or she stays around! ~Kylu (u|t) 23:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My second go

Ok, so Mujahedeen KOMPAK doesn't have an image, but this time I've got a "hook" as you say: Did you know that... Australian charity donations have been diverted to organisations that behead schoolgirls?
brenneman 03:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case it's not really really clear from that semi-hysterical posting I am in serious need of some wiki-love, I'm totaly fertummelt: People say "What is wrong with the world?" but it's not the world, it's the people. We do things like this to each other, and for what?
Aaron... I don't know what to say about the larger picture. That article is good, and it's a sad topic and it's a worthy nom. I would certainly pick it in turn. Will it in some small way help? Certainly. But we can't solve the world's problems by ourselves, all we can do is do our small bit to help. This project will make the world a better place, I really believe that. As to your need for wikilove... I'm starting to wonder about that whole wikilove thing, maybe it's not that healthy to seek complete validation that way. Good collegiality in our interactions maybe better than out and out love... but if you're on IRC sometime I would love to chat. Helps any? I dunno. Hang in there, don't let stuff get you down my friend... ++Lar: t/c 13:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think the fugue has passed. I went and got a zabaglione gelato and sat and watched err, people, walking in the park. It's been over thirty degrees tha last few days and "people" are wearing very little, I might add.
On a wiki-philosophical note there have been discussions on the Citizendium forums about the whole barnstar/DYK/wikilove thing. People need validation if they are going to keep working for free, and while I'm normally a bit more reserved I think that there is a place for the Phaedriel-style enthusiastic affection.
Not that I'm suggesting we do that of course. *insert manly grunting noises*
brenneman 00:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Enthusiastic affection is good for the soul, Brenny. Now then... what were' these people wearing, exactly? (the juxtaposition is deliberate) It's over 30 degrees here too, but unfortunately, not much over, and that's in farenheit, not celsius. ++Lar: t/c 03:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Cheers Lar, appreciate all the work you guys do at DYK. Nice one, Deizio talk 14:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Hey there, Lar. I recently got involved in the DYK business, and I just added myself to the list of admins to seek when the page is backlogged. I have a question, though. Is there some template you use when crediting people for the DYK's? I couldn't find any crediting template anywhere, so I was wondering if there was a template for it, or if it is just text that you copy and paste from each talk page you visit. Thanks a lot for any help, Lar. Happy Holidays, too. =) Nishkid64 23:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copy paste would be slow, so ... I have automation for it in my javascript. see User:Lar/DYK/monobook.js for the actual code, and user:Lar/moretabs/monobook.js and User:Lar/monobook.js for how it's hooked in. I can help you install it if you can't suss it out yourself, LMK. If you've modded your monobook stuff before it should be no big deal, if you haven't... maybe I should write instructions. Here is best to reply, I like to stay threaded... ++Lar: t/c 00:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not that great with javascripts, so I think I need some help here. I made user:Nishkid64/DYK/monobook.js. I tried tweaking it, but I really can't seem to understand what to do. Nishkid64 00:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I reset the clock when I saw you hadn't. It originally said something like 05:30 or something, but I guess 06:12 is fine. Also, we'll get your DYK into Next Update after it is cleared. Nishkid64 02:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the load, you have to make calls to add the functions to your menus for the right sort of pages (in your main monobook, you should have some calls that look like:
     addlilink(talkm,'javascript:updated_dyk()','DYK-Auth');
     addlilink(talkm,'javascript:updated_dyk_nom()','DYK-Nom');
(those are in a function that adds menu items to tabs for user talk pages, see my moretabs/monobook.js). I have done things in a way that is particularly confusing since I use two layers of functions and calls. I should clean that up so it's easier to use for others. Let me take a look and see if I can suggest precisely what to do. we have friends over so it won't be for a while. ++Lar: t/c 02:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Aite, I'm really confused now lol. I'll talk to you when you get back. Nishkid64 20:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ever on IRC? that may actually be the fastest way to sort this out. I could just make changes to your monobook but would want to be live with you at the time. I think I will carve out a callable function that you just add to your main hooks. You COULD try calling mine, load http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lar/moretabs/monobook.js as well as the DYK one, and then in your main monobook.jsmm make sure you have a call to add_moreTabs(); like this: 

/************
//MAIN
//************

addOnloadHook(Mainfast)
function Mainfast() 
{
    changemovetab();
    changelinks();
    addpurge();
    addtoolboxlinks();
    add_more_tabs();

}

window.onload = Main;
function Main() 
{
    addtoplink();
    LivePreviewInstall();
    if(addSinceTab)
    {addSinceTab();}
}
//END
//************

But that brings in WAY more than you need to do to get these three helper functions. Which is why I should write a function that is all one neat/tidy package. Maybe in a day or two... ++Lar: t/c 21:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK couldn't sleep, so I hacked out a standalone function add_DYK_tabs. Dunno if this will work, but it should. I looked in your monobook.js and ALL you have to do (everything else you already do, because you include that one lar/DYK/monobook.js) is change this: 

function Mainfast() 
{
    userlogs();
    changelinks();
    navigationlinks();
    addtoolboxlinks();
}

to this: 

function Mainfast() 
{
    userlogs();
    changelinks();
    navigationlinks();
    addtoolboxlinks();
    add_DYK_tabs();
}

... that is, add a call to add_DYK_tabs(); and you should see some new tabs on the article talk page while in edit, and on the user talk page while in edit. mouse over those tabs and you shold see the function invocations. LMK if that works... ++Lar: t/c 08:37, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er, I see you changed your monobook to load YOUR OWN copy of ../DYK/monobook.js. That will work too, but you would also need to load your own copy of ../moretabs/monobook,js and where I told you to put add_DYK_tabs(), put add_more_tabs(); instead and you'll get the whole slew of tab functions I do. Hope that helps! ++Lar: t/c 08:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I changed it to add_more_tabs(); and it totally messed up my sidebar; it basically duplicated everything. Also, the DYK buttons in the bottom toolbox are not shown. I don't go on IRC anymore, but I will go on if you will just tell me when you will be on. Nishkid64 23:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, can we talk on AIM? I already added you and I'll try to get a hold of you, asap. Nishkid64 23:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Will look for you tomorrow, just got back form being away, sorry I missed you... ++Lar: t/c 04:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to close the loop for those following along at home, this version of Nish's monobook works correctly using versions of my code then current. ++Lar: t/c 00:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

I'll not have any access for few days starting in about 2 hours, but I'll have a look through and see if I can pull some out for the next update. I mentioned to Blnguyen that I don't see a problem with doing the update yourself provided somebody else has moved your article into Next update (as you're only carrying out the manual process on behalf of the people who have chosen the articles). Not saying I'm going to chose your nom anyway, of course ;) Yomanganitalk 00:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stewardship Election

Disappointed you were unsuccessful in your bid for Stewardship on Meta.
All the best for Christmas and New Year!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by RoscoHead (talk • contribs) 03:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you. I appreciated your support. ++Lar: t/c 05:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your article, Thornapple River, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On December 24, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thornapple River, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Nishkid64 14:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Image:US National Christmas Tree 1923.jpg

Thank you for your note. I have followed your advice and deleted the local file, and protected the page. - Mark 10:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I sound annoyed, but...

Protect the image, THEN add the protection template, THEN change the Main Page. In that order. – Gurch 11:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And only that order. Again, sorry if I sound annoyed, but it's really not the sort of thing I want to wake up to on Christmas Day. Especially not when it happened the previous day as well. – Gurch 11:21, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to be annoyed, I flubbed up badly. it was 2 AM ish but that's no excuse. ++Lar: t/c 11:25, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is... I shouldn't even be here, the other Main Page "incidents" (three this month alone) were nothing to do with you at all. It's just really starting to irk me now. After it happened yesterday I stormed over to WP:AN and told everyone this wasn't good enough; apparently I was "rude", and I'm scared to go back there now. Then I decided OK, no matter what this is NOT happening on Christmas Day, I sat there until 1 AM (my time), on Christmas Eve, checking and re-checking every picture, template, everything. (I did in fact discover that while the heavily-used Template:Currentdate was protected, the equally heavily-used Template:CURRENTDATE that redirects to it, used on Talk:Main Page, among other things, was not. So I guess some good came of it). Anyway, I went to sleep satisfied nothing was going to happen, woke up Christmas morning, turned on the computer, hit the Main Page and.... Yeah, OK, it was bad timing, but still. I guess I should go do something more festive now – Gurch 11:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not mad you turned up here to berate me, because I DID forget... Some good will come of it... see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Shadowbot2, a bot to watch for this and scream for help if any one flubs. Happy holidays, Gurch, and thanks for caring. ++Lar: t/c 11:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK on Christmas day

Hello, Lar. Thank you for selecting my Christmas tree article for DYK on Christmas day. You've made this Christmas a special holiday for me. Thank you. Merry Christmas and Happy 2007 ! Take care. -- PFHLai 20:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was pleased to pick it, very fitting article. I was not so pleased with myself for getting sloppy, the image was vandalised because I didn't properly protect it. All is right now, and the article is off the page, but it was embarassing for me! But that has nothign to do with you... thank you very much for sharing with us all that wonderful article. ++Lar: t/c 13:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry too much about the silly vandalism. This one was quickly fixed, long before I logged in yesterday. .... Thank you for your kind words. I'm glad that you like my article. :-) Take care. --PFHLai 04:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recall

I've put together some thoughts at User:Friday/recall. This is in early stages right now so I understand if there's not really enough there for you to work with. But, feel free to have a look. As for clerking, not sure how you wanted to process, but maybe making a subpage for this recall petition is the way to go? Main comments, and endorses or opposes would go on the main page, and extended discuss would go on its talk page. I also don't know whether you were thinking of strictly an organizational role, or whether you would also read consensus and make a statement about whether the complaint has good cause. Anyway, have a look and respond as you will. Friday (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DYK

Hello. Do you think Zaolzie article could be nominated to DYK ? It is about 2 years old but was lately completely rewritten by me. Thanks. - Darwinek 02:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think technically it does not qualify. This version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zaolzie&oldid=93125551 is from december 9 and is not a stub. It certainly could be put up as a Good Article candidate but DYK is supposed to be for all new, or massively expanded, articles, and articles that were not stubs don't technically qualify. I am sorry. I think you did an awesome job on the rewrite, sorry if that's not what you wanted to hear. ++Lar: t/c 04:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problemo :). I will nominate it for GA. Thanks. - Darwinek 10:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK notification headline

Hiya Lar. Thanks again for notifying me of the Bayajidda DYK a few days ago - it was a nice Christmas present. As I was making some minor changes to my talk page a few hours ago, I actually focused on the headline for a few moments, and it occurred to me that it could be looked on as a violation of the Ownership of articles policy. After all, even though I created Bayajidda, and made all the edits as of now, it isn't my article - it's Wikipedia's article. I just happen to be the primary contributor.

Because of this, could I recommend that you consider changing the headline (I think you add it manually, since I see no sign of a header at {{UpdatedDYK}}) to something like "An article you started, Bayajidda, was selected for DYK!"? Picaroon 05:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's in my automation, which can be found at User:Lar/DYK/monobook.js... good point, I have a change along those lines. Thanks for raising the issue. ++Lar: t/c 12:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, MumbleArticle, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On December 27, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article MumbleArticle, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 12:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!

Updated DYK query On 27 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article canoe livery, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thank you for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Your congrats

Hi Lar :-) Thanks for your congrats and support. Going to do some editing for a few days to relax before I jump into ArbCom. Going to be an interesting road ahead, for sure! --FloNight 14:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recall clerking

Hi Lar. What exactly is the purpose of clerking Friday's recall? If you're not the one making the decision on whether it's valid (as I had assumed), then what are you doing aside from making a long official-looking page? -- SCZenz 18:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are Friday's criteria after all. I will, once I know what they are, make a trial determination for Friday, if desired, but it ultimately is Friday's call and Friday can over turn me... The clerk function is a neatening and tidying function (just as with the more formal ArbCom clerking) not a deciding one. It's a clerk, not a judgeship. If the community doesn't like how Friday decides, they can file an RfAr or RfC on their own, that's the check/balance that is always there (so far that never happened, this process got a nice neat tidy outcome in a collegial way). To say that I'm just making a long and official looking page is perhaps unkind, but not far off the mark. :) More accurate would be to say I am making a shorter and more official looking page (that serves as an archive, just as a deletion discussion does)... :) The current talk page is a bit of a mess, hmm? See Bunchograpes's recall or Crzrussians' recall, (I gave the links), to see what the end result is. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 18:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am worried that you're creating bureaucracy rather than adding content. The existing page was pretty readable, at least in the sense that it was possible to skim (or not skim) sections with various types of well-labeled info as anyone saw fit. But now you have an official format for recall pages that you've used twice, and I worry that soon we'll have guidelines and an elected clerk position and so on. I also note that Friday has written criteria already. -- SCZenz 19:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I saw them, but I can't actually apply them in a meaningful way yet to those folks, which I've asked Friday about. This is a voluntary process and I'd oppose any formalisation of it into rules that were somehow imposed on anyone. But I think some structure is useful. And Friday asked me to clerk it. The tracking of who is valid and who isn't should be separated from the comments and so forth in my view. Note that the category itself is up for deletion, it just happened. You may want to voice your views there too. I am certainly leery of bureacracy, which concern came up the last two times I did this too... ++Lar: t/c 19:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I just wanted to mention that concern, mostly because making small comments emphasizing the need to avoid something is much easier than derailing it when it starts to happen. The recall idea can be useful if it's handled sanely, and it would seem for the most part that you're doing a good job in making sure that happens. -- SCZenz 22:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And fair enough in turn. Forewarned is half an octopus, after all. Totally agree that avoiding process is goodness. I'm just lazy and hate making pages up from scratch. :) ++Lar: t/c 23:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paint the house?

Is that some kind of koan? - brenneman 05:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brenny! er, no? But maybe this is: "Children, I have come here like the rest of you... to hear what I have to say." --Sojourner Truth ++Lar: t/c 05:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your clerking of the process to recall Friday. It seems you did a completely fair job on it and I have no complaints. If we had realised that we did not have sufficient legit supportere, then of course we would not have proceeded. Maybe everyone can learn a little from this. I have--Light current 21:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Image

How is Image:Laurel1.jpg even relevant to DYK? None of the items even match this picture. Nishkid64 18:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an image from the lead article. That article was picked a bit hurridly, to be sure, as it had been 17 hours, and the lead that was there was not a very good hook... the other article that even HAD an image, the image was copyvio. That was the first article I could find that had any kind of image. A bit of a stretch though. Feel free to change things around if need be. Did I forget to give the "pictured" bit??? oops! ++Lar: t/c 19:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS "what links here" for the image did show its usage, but ya, I goofed in not doing the (pictured) thing. Sorry for the confusion and thanks to whoever found a better one. Are you sorted with your script automation now or ? ++Lar: t/c 20:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No I left the script stuff alone for now. Also, I was the one who went to Dec 25 to find another picture lol. Anyway, what are you planning to do with the two articles? I rewrote the first DYK at next update, and I think that's fine, but what's the problem with the second one? I know it's not that long, but besides the image, what was the problem with that? Nishkid64 21:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, can you go on AIM? I added "larrypieniazek" already. Nishkid64 21:17, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Alexander Mantashev - the hook as it was had issues, those two people were not notable, I didn't think, or at least the hook didn't say why. the hook now is fine if less "exciting", and I support it going in on the next update. Max Reichpietsch - we (at least formerly) can't have an image in an article on DYK that has problems. The article itself is fine but there was an older long standing policy that out and out copyvio (text or image) wasn't used... had to be cleared up first. Once that's sorted, the article's fine. Hope that helps, thanks for taking the load on all these updates you've been doing lately! ++Lar: t/c 21:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS I'm on AIM now, email me your nick? thanks! ++Lar: t/c 21:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
E-mail sent, and thanks for clearing up all that business. =) Nishkid64 21:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Bye Lar!

I did tell you this earlier this evening - you see Kelly's mates are just too powerful [2] who will be the next to stand up to her I wonder. Giano 01:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google Patents

Actually, the article looks like a valid stub now. I'll give it a more specific stub tag. --Coredesat 01:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Whites Bridge, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On December 29, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Whites Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK automation troubles

Sorry to bother you again, but it seems that the DYK buttons removed my warning buttons from the VoA script. The warning buttons were in place of the DYK buttons before, and they had the t1, t2, t3, blocked, etc. warnings. Is there anyway to have both at the top of the editing page? Nishkid64 00:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely enough, the DYK messages and the warning messages show up when I am editing a user talk page that has not been edited before. Nishkid64 00:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that apparently when you add to a tab, you have to add ALL the functions you want to add to that tab at once, I think. The add_DYK_tabs() function is adding functions to a tab named "talk messages". And so is VOA's code. Whoever adds last wins. My way around that was to use a different function that adds all of them at once. It is called add_more_tabs(). Try that. If not, you may have to actually write your own function to add all the functions you want. OR you could have a different tab maybe instead of one named "talk messages" perhaps. LMK if that makes sense or not. ++Lar: t/c 00:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I kinda understand what you're saying. It's just that...I don't know how to fix it. Your tab is talk messages while VOA's is {messages}. Wouldn't that make em different? Nishkid64 02:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
what really matters is the label given the tab internally, not the displayed label... that is, does he use 'talkm'? a fragment...
  if (document.title.indexOf("Editing User talk:") != -1)
    {
      addlimenu(tabs, 'Talk messages', 'talkm');
      var talkm = document.getElementById('talkm').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
... I will check later. ++Lar: t/c 02:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Appreciate it. =) Nishkid64 02:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Try it now. I changed 'talkm' to a different variable, hopefully unique. I can't quite find which of VoA's code chunks was hanging functions on that tab so am not totally sure it's a fix. LMK. ++Lar: t/c 13:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
hmm...doesn't seem to work. Also, thanks for adding the dyk-no sign thing. Nishkid64 19:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ok, will check when I get back... (not logged in)... 71.205.16.129 22:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Status: so where are we at? did the new tab show up at all? or it showed up but didn't work? Let me know. Long term I think finding a way to hang new functions on an existing tab owuld be a good thing but I'm not necessarily that skilled yet... ++Lar: t/c 01:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it works now. =) Of course, I'm on a laptop now, so I don't know if it's really fixed or my computer sucks. :-P Thanks, Lar. Btw, I've congratulated myself for DYK 3 or 4 times so far. Lol =) Nishkid64 02:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are the odds that it doesn't work on my computer...God...lol. Whatever, just leave it. I can live with this now lol. Thanks for all, Lar. =) Nishkid64 21:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it doesn't? Well, I think I have a fix, maybe, based on some stuff VoiceOfAll told me. I need to hack for a while so it may be a few days. ++Lar: t/c 21:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's just my computer. Why would it work on my laptop, but not on my PC? Nishkid64 01:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Try doing purges and cntl-alt-r's on every monobook page you use. your computer might still have older versions cached while your laptop loaded a newer version... that's al I can think of. Are both machines running the same version of firefox? Thanks. PS , happy new year! ++Lar: t/c 14:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the belated response. Happy New year, and I think my laptop is running the latest version, while I'm running 1.5 on this one. I'll see what I can do. Nishkid64 03:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Thank you for placing the article on St. Stephen Coleman Street on DYK. Had I logged into Wikipedia that day and seen a reference to my article on the main page, I would have fallen off my chair. I started contributing to Wikipedia this month, so find your action very encouraging. (Mark C Grant 13:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Glad to hear it! That's the point of DYK, to recognise valuable contributions. Please keep helping make Wikipedia a better resource, see you around! ++Lar: t/c 13:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

FYI, I've just sent you an email requesting approval. Thanks, alphachimp. 16:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should be sorted now, please let me know if there are other things... ++Lar: t/c 01:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

150

Sorry, I meant to say month, I'm not sure why I said "week." But now that I look at it, it was early this month, not last month, so I'm doubly wrong. I'll just paste the pertinent portion of the contribs bellow for you (of course, feel free to remove it upon glancing, it lengthy). Regards, El_C 04:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly's log excerpts
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Brown truss, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On January 1, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brown truss, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 23:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larbot

Hi, User:Larbot currently states:

I am getting this account because at some point I may want to run a bot. This account does NOT currently run any bots ...

Given that you are now using it; you might want to consider rewording that page. Thanks – Gurch 18:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gurch. It's still not a bot account, but the wording is a bit confusing, so I added the following:
Note: As of this writing, the account is doing edits. However, all edits are being performed manually... I decided to try to use it for rote tasks like newsletter delivery and DYK thanking/crediting, in order to leave my own watch list and contrib history more fairly focused on non rote tasks. But as of this writing (Jan 2007) it's still not a bot account. (AWB is not a bot. Using a javascript function from a dropdown tab to add a previewable comment to a talk page in one click is also not a bot) Please direct any questions you might have to me, thanks! The statement about it not ever voting or commenting substantively in discussions where it is not clear that it is me speaking, continues to hold and I continue to request notice if you ever see that violated. ++Lar: t/c 19:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hope that sorts it, let me know if it still needs clarifying. I guess maybe I should have went with the name lar_servant or lar_boringedits or something :) ++Lar: t/c 19:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's fine. I think "Bot" in an account name is generally recognized to refer to any kind of special-purpose repetitive-editing account, automated or not; the important thing, though, is that if you are actively using the account for something, the userpage makes that clear. Thanks – Gurch 19:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks for suggesting that this be clarified. ++Lar: t/c 19:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a Friendly Reminder

Just a friendly reminder, but the image recently added to T:DYK was not protected properly. Up until just now, only the local page was protected, leaving the Commons image vulnerable to vandalism (as the commons image was not locally uploaded). -- tariqabjotu 19:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drat. I wasn't the protector, just the checker after the fact when I promoted, and I misread the templates and status that was there. Thanks for the heads up and thanks for sorting it. That's twice I've bobbled images lately. Note that if only the image info page is protected (no local upload) you have to protect the commons image, but if you DID local upload, you don't. the template placed claimed it was local uploaded but I missed that it was not. I'm a commons admin too, became one partly so I could do this... correctly... grr at me. Thanks again. ++Lar: t/c 19:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... I probably would have made the same mistake were I you, because I tend to trust that the template means all is in order. I made the same note to the protector as well. -- tariqabjotu 20:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for your message about the DYK box. The page is protected since I got a lot of hate/spam discussion entries (now deleted, even from the version history) by some stupid German group that I have a lot of trouble with, due to some Wikipedia entries. Since I don't check it very often anyway, I did not bother to get it opened, as I much prefer talk entries at my German pages anyway. --AndreasPraefcke 19:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok... works for me. I won't quote policy about protection being temporary etc... not going to worry about it. ++Lar: t/c 20:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Larbot

Thank your bot for notifying me about the DYK update ^^ --Deryck C. 13:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

) ++Lar: t/c 13:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Fallasburg Bridge, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On January 5, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fallasburg Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 04:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

admin coaching link box

Hi Lar, just wanted to say I wasn't ignoring you about the link box. I just haven't gotten to it yet. I removed it from the one page because it pushed the big links (Requests, Volunteers, Status) into 2 lines, and I thought it just looked bad. There's probably a way to fix that, and maybe we can combine those major links with the less-important ones.. anyway, I'll get to it, or feel free to mess around with it if you like. Not like I claim ownership or something. Cheers and happy weekend, Fang Aili talk 22:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

np. It was only one line on my monitor but I run really big. Maybe put the big links into the box too, but bigger fonts? some of them are actually twice. Which all did you remove them from? or point me to the discussion? thanks ++Lar: t/c 04:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles Newsletter - Issue No.9 template thingy

Well, it may have been a simple instruction for those with some brains - but it is beyond me... Is it possible to set the blessed thing up so all I (or anyone as incompetent - some ask!) have to do is add in the numbers and dates and remove all the nowiki tags and hit save? This is getting beyond embarrassing and into annoying... LessHeard vanU 20:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I may have done it... trouble is, I don't know if I have or where to find the stupid thing if I have created it!LessHeard vanU 20:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let me give it a boo. (your contrib history would show you any file you saved and where it is...) If it is not quite right at the moment I'll sort it for you. (For starters you don't EDIT the template, you use it on a page..... I'll revert the changes and sort out the page) Gimme a sec ++Lar: t/c 20:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorted. See Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue 009 which is the correct place I think. Again, just visit the template, visit the page you want to start, and paste the text at the top of the template in, changing the months and numbers and etc, and save. ++Lar: t/c 21:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So... I open a blank page and add the subst tag (including all the dates & numbers) from the template page to that - and the format copies over? Thanks for your help.LessHeard vanU 21:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right. that is, paste {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Template|this issue number (###)|this issue date (Month Year)|last month (Month)|next issue number (###)|next issue date (Month Year)|your username}} into the new page and change stuff to fit. Then save the page and go back into edit and start editing in content. In fact, the way to get the "right" page to work on, is to follow the red link from the current month's newsletter, it already points to the right place for next months to be. LMK when you're ready and I will give it a once over and deliver it. Meanwhile the template maybe needs better instructions? :) ++Lar: t/c 21:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is as finished as it is going to be - I doubt if any more effort is going to improve it. Please send out as soon as convenient (I have left the distributor credit blank).LessHeard vanU 21:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the heads up. I think I will first send out a little blurb to the inactives "you didn't get the newsletter beause it looks like you are inactive, we are going to remove your name but you can always add back if you want" or something like that. ++Lar: t/c 21:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatles and forking articles

I have a problem that I would like to impart to all you good 'Beatles project' editors, and it is this:

  • Should anything directly Beatles-related be in the main Beatles' article, and only 'personal' stuff put into the Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr articles? I have the disturbing feeling that I'm repeating stuff in both Lennon and McCartney articles that should only be in the main article.
  • But... if only personal stuff is included in the individual Beatles' articles, would it make them too confusing/random, to read?

Please answer (on a stamped and self-addressed postcard please) on our talk page. (This might be more interesting than talking about MBEs... :) andreasegde, Mr Hornby, and Sir Sean de Garde 15:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Which talk page? the one for the main article, Talk:The Beatles ?? Often when asking for help from busy people it really is best to give them as much help to get to where they need to go to help you as you possibly can. Links are a great way to speed up getting help! Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 15:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By "our talk page" I assumed he meant those silly names of his talkpage. That is where I commented.LessHeard vanU 21:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Hi Lar, as a Commons admin, I was wondering if you could help with: WP:ANI#Underage images posted to Erection. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 16:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I commented there but it looks sorted to me, Nilfanion was on the case! ++Lar: t/c 17:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That Nilfanion's just too fast! Thanks for checking it out -- Samir धर्म 18:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. Go support him for admin here if you haven't already! He's that good! ++Lar: t/c 23:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your offer of help at WP:ANI. I now have an account on Commons so I'll be sure to post to the Commons admin noticeboard should I notice a problem like that again. WJBscribe (WJB talk) 04:24, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

friendly reminder

Hey Lar, just a reminder, you wanted to put more work by Elizabeth Margaret Chandler on Commons, also Thanks for the user page ideas, I left you a response on my talk page:) Epousesquecido 01:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, yes. I will certainly see what I can do about Ms. Chandler's works. ++Lar: t/c 03:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Request for Adminship

Thanks for contributing to my RfA! Thank you for your nomination of and support in my my RfA, which passed with a tally of 117/0/1. I hope that my conduct as an admin lives up to the somewhat flattering confidence the community has shown in me. Please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page should you need help or want to discuss something with me. Has there been much progress on the Wikipedia:CommonsTicker? I saw toolserver managed to start replicating en the other day, so hopefully thats not too far off. By the way, if you want Coredesat's phone number I'll get hold of it for you :P--Nilfanion (talk) 15:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

use of images in The Beatles Discography section

Hi, Lar. There is a debate regarding the fair use of images in a gallery format in the main article under the Discography section. The person suggesting removal is an Admin, so I/we are taking their point very seriously and I would like you to cast your eye over the arguments and comment if appropriate. There was a previous new editor who was keen on removing said section for reasons of duplication, (see my talkpage), but hopefully a reasoned conclusion to the image question should settle that also. LessHeard vanU 00:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put my oar in. We shall see. ++Lar: t/c 01:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let me stress I have no axe to grind there; I even hope you are right in your more liberal interpretation of the rules. --Guinnog 22:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't doubt it for a moment, my friend. Whatever's best for the encyclopedia and the readers. BTW and completely unreleatedly (except that there were some songs in it by our fab 4), I saw Children of Men yesterday, that movie scares the crap out of me. I may have to go knock someone up, just to feel better. ++Lar: t/c 03:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trentino-Alto Adige

I see that no traction has been made in the mediation process. Just thought you should know...

I did some research and checked with some pretty credible sources as to what they print, in ENGLISH, for the name of this region (and province) in Italy.

  • Fodor's - a well recognized and respected name (and expert guide) has regional and local publications that show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".
  • Michelin - also expert in travel guides - has regional and local publications that show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bozen".
  • Rand McNally (name speaks for itself) has world, regional, and local publications that show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".
  • Streetwise Map's regional, and local publications show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".
  • Dorling Kindersley or "DK" - by far, probably the best travel guides available - has regional and local publications that show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".
  • Lonely Planet (the self-proclaimed largest independently-owned travel guide) regional, and local publications show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".
  • Hammond Map - a subsidiary of Langenscheidt Publishing Group (a privately-held German publishing company) - has regional and local publications that show the region and local names of "Trentino-Alto Adige", "Alto Adige", and "Bolzano".

As far as proof, I am quite sure that the above sources are credible enough, especially in the sense of geographical knowledge, expertise, and English-translation. Rarelibra 03:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 9, January 2007

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 009 – January 2007

Beatles News
  • The ongoing divorce proceedings between Paul McCartney and the former Heather Mills continues to occupy the attention of the media - Heather Mills reportedly receiving unspecified death threats.
  • The British Post Office have released a series of stamps depicting various Beatles album covers.
Project News
  • The Paul McCartney article is being primped and primed for submission as a Featured Article candidate.
  • The good folk who have been working on the above article have turned their attention to the John Lennon page. Everyone is, of course, invited to contribute.
  • The hottest Project page this month has been the Macca (Paul for those not in the know!) article, again.
  • Other Project news... Please let the editors know if anything is happening, or just contribute it to the next newsletter.
Member News
Issue of the Month

The question of capitalising of the letter "t" in The of The Beatles has been raised again. It appears that UK style references (here and here) also maintains that the letter should be in lower case. If the Project is to be appear professional then it may have to change the format. Polite discussion is invited at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Policy. If possible, please provide sources/references to support your position.

From the Editors

It has been a fairly quiet time with regard to the Project (or at least that is how it seems). If you are reading this and wondering why your efforts in respect of a Beatles article has not been mentioned, it may be that you haven't told any editor. This is your Newsletter, which means you can contribute to it, so please do!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 010 – January/February 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Complete To Do List
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Comments on issue

OI!!! (re the lead). Thanks for your efforts! LessHeard vanU 21:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am using AWB this time (and using my bot account) ... AWB is, if anything, slower than how I did it before. But I'm also sorting out who is on and off the subscriber list... see Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/PossiblyInactive and parallel pages. ++Lar: t/c 21:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(copy of query posted on 'PossiblyInactive talkpage); Can we be clear on this; inactive on Wikipedia or the project? LessHeard vanU 22:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP is my thinking. I go by if all I see on their talk page is several months of newsletters. They can be project inactive, I don't think that's so bad. if they are WP active but project inactive they can remove themselves if they want. Why don't you go ahead and update that way? ++Lar: t/c 22:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Me? I'm (only) just a newsletter editor! :)
I will have a look, I suppose the contrib history is the best method, it indicates whether they are pressing keys or not - not whether they are talking. Hey, I hope contrib history is included in the listing... LessHeard vanU 22:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC) Edit; no, they aren't! Er........ let me sleep on it, I will see what I can do! LessHeard vanU 22:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trentino-Alto Adige

Hello Lar, just wanted to check with you if you were still going to be able to (eventually) help us come up with a naming convention. My regards, Taalo 18:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i very much want to help with this and realise it's been a while, which I'm sorry about. Rarelibra provided some data, above, that might be relevant to this. ++Lar: t/c 18:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Note my only concern was that you might not have time, etc. Is there anything a few of us (on both sides of the argument) can help in the grunt work? regards, Taalo 20:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple personalities

It said, in the last Beatles' newsletter, that "Sir Sean de Garde appears to have developed multiple personalities." This is very true (and made me laugh an awful lot) but it is necessary when one is faced with talking to one on one's pages that one has contributed to. (Work that one out... :) The changing of one's name brings tremendous amusement to one - as other editors are wont to do the same. I refer you to members, Vera, Chuck, and Dave, LessHeard vanU, and Crestville, who have given one a terrific amount of pleasure in the general 'laughing gear' area, because of their inovative choices of Nom de plumes. One can only hope that this practice does not offend one's own sense of normality. One can only live in hope. :)) Who am I? 20:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you in turn are making ME snicker, well done. However I cannot take credit for that particular turn of phrase, that credit goes to LHVU. I think he just wanted to give you a bit of the business, and it looked like it worked :) I'd strongly advocate that you do some contributing in the NEXT issue so that you can in turn, give HIM what for. Cheers. ++Lar: t/c 21:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The 'v' in LHvU is in lowercase, dammit. I am a professional writer of 'u' 's, and do not like my painfully akwired talent to be admonished... Sir Cur sur Slur
So stipulated. now what is akwired? it sounds painful! Asker of impertinent questions 01:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding protection of Template:WPPT

I can understand your concern that someone may vandalize the template, but what the hell. I'm the creator of it, and now am forbidden of making further edits to it? How am I supposed to improve it? By making timid requests that nobody will care? I'm no admin, and no one's going to nominate or turn me into one, so please do semi-protect the page instead.--Saoshyant talk / contribs (please join WP:PT or WP:SPOKEN) 10:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oops! I just came across it randomly, I am trying to convert some templates to take the small=yes parm. I should have checked more closely. Now semi, and apologies for any inconvenience. Please advise if you need further assistance, and I'll try to make sure itactually is "assistance"! Happy editing... ++Lar: t/c 14:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you putting things back together. Semi-protection was most welcome, but... you know already know my position on full protection. I don't know what the small=yes parameter you added does, but I assume good faith and that it will be useful to other editors. Thanks again.--Saoshyant talk / contribs (please join WP:PT or WP:SPOKEN) 16:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See Talk:25 de Abril Bridge the template is used in small mode there... some busy talk pages have so many templates that small mode lets the reader see the start of the talk without having to scroll down a page and a half. Small is an optional parm so for pages that don't use it, it has no effect. I plan to possibly convert all the bridge talk pages that need it to use small... Hope that helps and my apologies again. If you really think full unprotect is teh way to go I'll turn it back to unprotected. Just let me know. ++Lar: t/c 17:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks for the explanation. And no, do leave it as it is, please. I completely agree that if an outsider would vandalize it, it would be catastrophic in matters of server load. Since the few people involved in WP:PT are established users they will find no problem with the semi-protection.
Ah, on another matter, congrats for putting that banner on the top regarding acknowledging other people's work. I hope it helps more people stick around in Wp.--Saoshyant talk / contribs (please join WP:PT or WP:SPOKEN) 15:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a link you need

http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781400075546&view=excerpt Epousesquecido 22:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 19:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mainpage question

Hi Lar. I've been trying to provide guidance for the AFMP project with a less than great understanding of how the mainpage actually comes together to be the mainpage. I finally figured out that the mainpage is composed of five variable sections with the remainder of the page being text/section that does not change often (e.g., fixed text). Five independent groups control the content of the five variable sections. The fixed text to the mainpage includes navigation page, search box, in other languages section, masthead, Other areas of Wikipedia, Wikipedia's sister projects, Wikipedia languages, etc.) The discussion on the AFMP 2007 and AFMP 2006 project pages regarding these fixed text sections of the mainpage went in unfortunate directions, probably because there was a lack of understanding as to how the fixed text sections of the mainpage appear on the mainpage and who has authority over approving changes to these sections. I tried locating the person/group responsible for the fixed mainpage text, but could not. Do you happen to know who has approval over fixed sections of the mainpage and/or know of an article/page discussing how the mainpage comes to be the mainpage? Please post your response on my talk page. Thanks. -- Jreferee 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not myself know who is "in charge" (as much as anyone is said to be "in charge") of these sections. I think some of them may be in the MediaWiki: namespace, but I;m not sure. I know that there are projects that create alternate versions of the main page fixed sections and then get consensus on changes. Finding one of them may get you leads on who to talk to. I don't myself have time today to find out. Also asking on IRC might help? It does look like maybe a moot point though? You've declared consensus to be that we not change any of the fixed sections so maybe we don't need to do this... Hats off to you for taking on overall coordination of this (and a caution, to not be too quick to declare consensus unless you're sure... maybe call it "trial consensus" when you aren't sure it will stick?) ++Lar: t/c 19:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The more I thought about the AFMP project, the more I realized that each year will require new approval from those administrators who happen to be in charge of each section of the mainpage. While the AFMP 2007 contributors can decide not to seek approval to change the mainpage fixed text, I do not think the AFMP 2007 contributors can make that decision for the AFMP 2008 etc. contributors. My overall goal is to create a viable Wikipedia:WikiProject that provides guideance on all issues raised in AFMP 2006 and AFMP 2007 (e.g., if you want to change main page fixed text for the AFMP project, here is where you need to request such approval and cooperation). When I came to the AFMP 2007 project, it seemed to be the wild west with self appointed sheriffs and few rules (seemingly like the AFMP 2006 project). The effect was to make it an unhappy place to be and to drive away potent contributors. I've been working feverishly to add structure and some consensus directions to the project to minimize the opportunity for animosity so that we could just focus on content. (Hence, the quick consensuses.) Part of this had me making posts on many project and administrator user talk pages - so many that I became concerned that I may lose track of who I posted to. That is why I requested that you post on my talk page. I appreciate your courtesy notice and I do not like unthreaded conversations either. Thanks for the suggestion. I see if I can find a project that creates alternate versions of the main page fixed sections. That should help me figure out how the mainpage fixed text comes to be the mainpage fixed text. -- Jreferee 20:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, yes, I agree that knowing where to look for the fixed sections even if '07 doesn't change them is goodness... you're thinking farther ahead than I was! I did a quick check and remembered this Main Page alternative (Next DYK) and this Main Page alternative (Tomorrow and Next DYK). I think GeeJo set these up, so he may know. But I am not competely sure that the fixed sections are actually modded there... they may well be embedded elsewhere. See also anyone can edit which that page links. I think that's the part that would get changed for the "even people with no sense of humor" bit. (er, no it doesn't) See also [3] Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 20:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. After reviewing the Main Page alternative, I see my task will be even more difficult. The main page is composed of fixed text and changeable text. EXTERNAL to the main page (and every other wikipedia page) are the fixed text navigation window, search window, toolbox window, and copyright window. Posters to AFMP 2006 and AFMP 2007 suggested changing the text external to the main page as well. The AFMP project should include guidance on how to get approval and cooperation to change these, even if approval for such a change is very remote. That way, instead of uncivil or personal attack responses to proposed changes to the fixed text, the response to wacky suggestions can be: "That sound like it could work. Here is how you can get approval to get that done." The response is polite and placing the significant burden of obtaining such approval on the requestor may result in the requestor not pursuing the idea and yet still staying with the project to contribute in some other way. In any event, it should help minimize the apparent uncivil or personal attacks that have occurred in the AFMP project. I'll see if GeeJo can help. Thanks again. -- Jreferee 21:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked over the links that you provided. I think main page fixed text can be changed with a consensus reached at Talk:Main_Page. -- Jreferee 01:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are right... worth noting. ++Lar: t/c 03:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Partial page restoration

Quoted from Wikipedia talk:April Fool's Main Page:
The more ambitious thing to do is an "UNMERGE" where you delete, partially restore (undelete the newer part), move it to your destination, and then restore the rest of the revisions. If you have a good break point it's just a matter of clicking a lot of revisions individually. Tedious but doable. It also can be done whenever, its just the more edits, the more revisions to checkbox :) ++Lar: t/c 22:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, try ticking the checkbox for the first (or last) revision that you wish to restore. Then hold down the shift key and tick the checkbox for the revision on the opposite end of the range. Every checkbox in between should be automatically ticked. (If applicable, you can then manually untick any revisions that you don't intend to restore.) —David Levy 01:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ya I meant to mention that, but forgot. It doesn't always work for me. ++Lar: t/c 01:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's strange. What browser are you using? —David Levy 01:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Firefox 1.5xxx on Win XP. ++Lar: t/c 03:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, that's exactly what I'm using. Very odd. —David Levy 03:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agnes Nitt

I've unblocked Agnes. I suppose my block was a little over-the-top...hopefully she will not be a nuisance this time. Adam Bishop 20:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Seria Ludo

House of Scandal has created a page entitled "Seria Ludo" intended as a humorous and satirical continuation of discussion begun 23 January 2007 at Wikipedia talk:Did you know.

Hi. I just created a goofy, hopefully humorous user page called "Seria Ludo", the main context of which is me complaining about the length of the DYK hook we used for Fauna of Scotland. The following text is from the bottom of the page:

  • Lar - Thanks very much for your contributions to the conversation about the Hortus deliciarum hook earlier. Your respectful contributions were very soothing and statements such as "don't be discouraged" struck at what was for me the heart of the matter. I'm going to send you a Dr. Phil Barnstar or something, I just haven't figured out what yet.

I wanted to call the page to your attention and make sure you read the note I left for you therein. Thanks again. House of Scandal 03:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I skimmed it. Pretty funny stuff. Thanks for sharing and for being a good sport. ++Lar: t/c 14:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Socialism page

Your advice on the Socialism talk page is duly acknowledged, appreciated and will be taken to heart. I realized immediately after I clicked "save page" that I went a little too far with that final comment, and I struck it and appologized to the person at which it was directed. I do have a question though, if I may. I have been editing Wikipedia for almost two years now and never had any major problems with anybody. We either get along or respectfully agree to disagree. However, this particular editor, who is rather new, has been wiki-stalking me since our first disagreement and is now claiming that I am sending him threatening emails (which I stake my wiki-reputation that I am not). That was a big part of what led to my frustration with that comment. What should I do?--WilliamThweatt 19:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... tough. People do stalk, and it's a hard thing to prove or disprove definitively. But it's easier to show that it's likely than to prove it authoritatively. My advice would be to remain unfailingly civil in your interactions with this editor but stick to the point that the socialism page, as one that is highly contentious, needs more consensus than the average page does. Seek that consensus, be open to the suggestions of EE where they make sense, and do the right thing for the integrity of the page. If he continues to act in ways that you think are inappropriate, collect the diffs to show that there is stalking (edits of the same pages shortly after you visit them is a good circumstantial indication) and calmly present the information at the incident part of the Administrator's Noticeboard. As I said, the page has at least one more admin watching it now, at least for a while. I'll do my best to aid consensus. As for his allegation of threatening mails, it is hard to prove the negative. It's best to reveal that allegation in your report to ANI, should it come to that, though. Let us hope it does not. ++Lar: t/c 19:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

interjection

I must insist that you do not interject my statements with your comments. If you want to respond to my entry, please do so below it, not in its middle. Thanks, --Irpen 19:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interjection is a perfectly valid discussion technique. I must insist that you not revert the ordering that I make remarks in. ++Lar: t/c 19:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't have my statements interjected by your commenting on them, period. I did my best effort to restore the order by simply moving your comments below mine. If you don't want me to move your comments, I can delete them, if that's what you prefer, so that you will rewrite them yourself properly but I will not allow my statements to be interjected with your remarks. Use the space below them. Thanks, --Irpen 19:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a cite for that? ++Lar: t/c 19:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not wikilawyer. I am making a perfectly reasonable request to not have my statements commented upon in their middle interrupting their text flow. For the last time, I absolutely insist that you leave my comments alone when you respond to them. --Irpen 20:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you were reverting me without any other comment, causing me to do my work over again. You didn't ask, you insisted. ++Lar: t/c 20:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not ever delete your comments. If I did, I apologize. I moved them below my statement and I explained you why. If you think lack of context makes your comments unclear, edit them as you see fit to improve their clarity but leave mine alone. --Irpen 20:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair enough. I basically need to replicate every paragraph of yours, in its entirity, that I respond to. Would you prefer that I show them in italics? Just tag the beginning with "Irpen said"? or some other style? ++Lar: t/c 20:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you want. I leave it up to you. --Irpen 20:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Past issues aside

BTW, I do believe that you hold me responsible for your stewardship nomination being derailed. By opposing you, I meant no ill will against you personally in any way. I had doubts about your fitness to this sensitive position and acted upon them but I did not canvass votes against you and did not do anything other than opposed and explained why. I hope this matter is behind and we can concentrate on the current issues setting aside that past thing. --Irpen 20:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not hold you solely responsible for it, no. But firstly, I believe your assessment was incorrect, and your oppose was damaging, because your distortions of what happens on IRC did not get corrected. Further, I believe that circumstantial evidence shows that canvassing by someone against me was likely. I chose not to dig into exactly who did it, if anyone, and have no idea (or interest, at this time) about whether you were or were not contacted. ++Lar: t/c 20:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not contacted by anyone, that's for one. I was at Meta due to the then ongoing voting regarding the closure of Wikipedia in the so called "Siberian language". I saw the announcement about the ongoing stewardship vote and went there. I noticed two people familiar to me, you and Taxman. I knew of both being involved in secretive and, in my opinion, damaging to Wikipedia decisions (Taxman in Carnildo's promotion, you in Giano's block) and opposed both without going into a great detail behind my vote at all. No one responded to my opposing Taxman but you and Kylu started to comment on my oppose vote insisting that I explain myself. You did so by email too. Then I explained my vote in a great detail at your talk and we had a discussion to this matter. If that discussion affected others, it is not my fault. I was asked for the explanation and I provided it upon request.

Now, you say that my oppose was based on the "distortions" of what happened over IRC. Nevertheless, and to this day, you did not give a clear and complete answer that would provide your own version. Your answer was always an evasive denial. Below I asked this question again. If you finally give an account of that sad event, we will finally be able to resolve that old issue. --Irpen 21:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that sad incident

BTW, if you prefer to explain that sad incident (you/Kylu/Giano) here rather than at the WP:AN, please by all means do so. I know you denied the most commonly understood version of events but you never gave an alternative explanation or were, as it seemed to me, generally evasive. If you could for once say clearly what took place, this could end this issue's being resurrected time and again. --Irpen 20:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The most commonly understood version of events" is this - that Giano was engaged in conversation on my talk page with me in a manner that resulted in several other editors warning him that his remarks had went too far. One of them was Kylu, although she was not the first. She asked people for advice about giving a block, including me. I gave her advice, as did others, in various IRC channels. She then decided to give Giano a block. As she has stated repeatedly, no one, including myself, asked her to do it, she decided to do it on her own. She then posted a detailed justification for the block on AN/I, with diffs and an explanantion of why, and a statement that if she erred, it should be overturned. The block was overturned in fairly short order by Bishonen.
THAT is the most commonly understood version of the incident. And I completely agree with it, since it's the truth. There are other versions floating around which allege that I asked Kylu for the block. Those versions are all false in some way, since that didn't happen. But they are not, at least among reasonable editors, "the most commonly understood version of events". I hope that clears things up. ++Lar: t/c 21:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, first of all, if she was unsure so as to raise the block at ANI, why did not she first raise the issue at WP:ANI and did so after the block? I guess this is the question she better answer but there is a question that you can answer. Please be more specific on what you told her when she asked for advise. I would very much appreciate if you are as specific as you possibly can be. Best would be to post that log but if you don't have it, perhaps you can find someone who has it. Forrester is sure to have all logs for that channel. There is sure as hell no confidential stuff in that log like the checkuser data, personal info, etc. --Irpen 21:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I document every block at AN/I, except for simple vandalism blocks. Usually after the fact. It's a common, and good, practice, and I commend it to all admins. Blocks are preventative, not punitive, so sometimes there isn't time to have a long discussion on AN/I, at the speed that you can discuss things there, if warnings or whatever didn't work... that's where IRC is invaluable, discuss and get feedback, then act. That a block is documented after the fact at AN/I is in no way an implication that the blocker is unsure of anything. Nevertheless, I always say I am bringing it to AN/I for review. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 21:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Er, technically that should say "simple vandalism and 3rr blocks" since I document 3rr blocks at 3RR ++Lar: t/c 21:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what about the second part of my question above? --Irpen 21:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that continuing to answer every question you ask, without end, is useful. I gave my accounting of what happened. You cannot prove the negative. No quantity of produced logs showing no conversation happened in that log, in that channel, at that time, can prove without a doubt that some side channel or direct message wasn't used anyway. So basically it comes down to this... If you continue to repeat the distortion that I specifically asked Kylu to block Giano, you are calling me a liar, because that is not what happened.
Are you calling me a liar, or do you accept my version of events as true? At this point, there are no other explanations possible, and it really comes down to that, and nothing more. Yes or no. ++Lar: t/c 21:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not calling you anything. I am asking a complete account of events. I cannot force you to provide one. I note that you insist to refuse. That's all. Again, I am not calling you a thing. If I see the log, I will be satisfied and I will not be saying that there is more at the side channel. More, as I said, there is absolutely nothing in that discussion so confidential by nature that it should be kept secret. even more, if it took place at ANI, there would have been no issue. --Irpen 21:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided as full an account as I am going to. The negative cannot be proven. If you again repeat what I consider a distortion after I have given you a true accounting, you are then calling me a liar, whether you agree that you are or not. I hope I make myself clear on that point. As a convenience, if you could post all of your stuff on one go, it would be helpful... try using preview. I find it very frustrating to get edit conflicts on my own talk page because you take several edits to get what you want said. At least 3 in this case. ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so you refuse to elaborate. I am not convinced until I see the log that you refuse to provide. You may interpret my words any way you please. If you say it means that I call you a liar, it is your words and not mine. I am not calling you a liar. I am saying that you refuse to provide the account of the events. The rest is what you say, not me. --Irpen 22:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


If Kylu posted: "[This] is the conversation at Lar's talk that I think constitutes a blockable violation of WP:NPA. I would like to block but I am not 100% sure. Please advise." You would have suggested a course of action at ANI and we all would have seen it.

How would that not have worked? But there would have been no issue by now for sure. That's what's wrong in having such issues discussed over IRC. --Irpen 21:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Some things are best discussed over IRC. ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some things, yes. But again, what in that particular incident required the IRC confidentiality? We see the damage from its having been on IRC instead of ANI. What's the benefit of that? --Irpen 22:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your unblocking of Dino

Hello,

Are you aware that you helped unblock a user, Dino, who claimed that he contacted the author of a particularly contentious article, and then claimed that this author said that he never wrote said article here (when he did write the article - and it's even archived on his website!) - and based on this info, a Wiki Foundation employee (who is not an especially active editor) User:Carolyn-WMF edited a contested article and removed critical material based on these false claims by Dino? proof here I look forward to a complete investigation of this matter, and find the utter unresponsiveness of this WMF employee and another Foundation member, Danny Wool, when questioned about this matter by two Admins and two editors more than a little troubling. New ANI investigation here - - Fairness & Accuracy For All

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lar&oldid=103278848"