User talk:TParis

User:X!'s Stuff.

I could take over the edit counter or SoxBot. I've also been working on getting them from X!. What do you think?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 22:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

 Question: Have you been in contact with User:X! yet?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 23:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. I don't mind if you want to take over either.--v/r - TP 23:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I've planning on creating tools hence my account and I'm in the process of writing a few bots that can potentially help RfX's. So TallyBot, SoxBot, and toolserver would be a great addition.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 23:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Alright, well I just copied over all of X's scripts in his public_html folder and I'm trying to work on figuring out how his edit counter works so if you need any of his source code, he's already given me the go ahead to copy everything.--v/r - TP 23:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

That will help but, wouldn't it be easier for him to give us the password to his account and and move the data over. Bots too. Wouldn't it be easier for use to give the account passwords to the bots and then change the usernames to them?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 00:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Might be easier, but I don't think Wikipedia or toolserver would like that idea much. For the account, the CC-BY-SA 3.0 would require one owner of an account, that'd be X. For the toolserver, I don't think they'd like the idea at all either. However, if you create a new bot account with X's source code, I am sure the 'crats would speedy-approve the account.--v/r - TP 00:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Not even transferring ownership of it? Oh boy. Well then, could you provide me the links to the toolserver code as well as SoxBot and TallyBot?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 01:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you have an account? It's not all available on SVN.--v/r - TP 01:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I have a toolserver account, google account, and this account. Is there something else I need?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 01:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Nah, just point over at X's folder on toolserver. All the code is there. I'm still going through it all myself so I can't point you to specifically what you want.--v/r - TP 01:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 01:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I just got his edit counter working here--v/r - TP 01:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for reviving the edit counter! I and many others appreciate it very much. —Soap— 01:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Me too --Northernhenge (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Good job. Now for the rest. I'll create a backup to avoid such incidents in the future. We also have to fix the links to this counter as well. I'll start off with the RfA.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 01:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I am restructuring the code to have SoxBot operate under Cyberbot I. I hope to be done in a few days.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 10:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit Counter is not working. What's going on?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 20:26, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be working for me. What error are you getting?--v/r - TP 20:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It's working now. What about the other tools like article blamer and so forth? Are you taking care of them?

P.S. Where are you getting his toolserver codes from?—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 20:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I copied them right from his home folder to mine. I'm working on the others, but I'm out pulling weeds in the yard today. I've been meaning to do some chores around the house for the last couple of weeks but the new unblock tool has kept me too busy to do it so I'm taking this weekend to get some work done. Once the sun goes down, I'll look at getting more tools working.--v/r - TP 20:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

In the meantime, I will continue readapting his bot code to try and get them going and approved as quickly as possible. Updating the RfX Table and Tally is starting to become a bother to me. At least everyone has their stats though.

Oh and don't forget to adjust the links to the tools. They're still linked to soxred93.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 21:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your work. We are very sad on Hungarian Wikipedia that X! has retired and his account has expired, and we hope that Soxred93's other tools also will be available soon. Samat (talk) 10:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

They are, the links simply haven't been updated in the tools. When you click on a link, you have to replace soxred93 with tparis in the URL to get it to appear.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 10:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, you are right. (I have still found some minor problems, for example Access denied for user 'tparis'@'%.toolserver.org' to database 'u_soxred93'.) Samat (talk) 10:56, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I havent found a whole lot of time this week to work on the tools. I'm considering starting up a toolserver project for the tools so more folks can have access to it. Trying to get X!'s ok.--v/r - TP 10:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I've been working with X!'s google repository and started adapting the toolserver code. I may beat him to the punch but we'll just wait and see. :)—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 11:03, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping these tools up! Swarm ^X 15:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Soxred93 tools

Regarding project space for Soxred93's tools, you might place them on http://toolserver.org/~nlwikibots . This is an account maintained by several users and doesn't risk becoming expired. You can contact them at nlwikibots AT toolserver.org or ask the users who maintain it Erwin, Akoopal and Multichill on their Dutch Wikipedia userpages (don't worry about asking in English, most Dutch people speak English). I hope you can put them on a project page as these are widely used tools. S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 20:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm actually looking at getting an English Wikipedia equivalent. Something like ~tools.--v/r - TP 21:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

That would be a great idea. But remember the tools are used by users on many Wikipedia projects, not only enwp or nlwp. Good luck with it! S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 21:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm willing to let anyone on the project who wants access, I just think we'd be better off with a clean home for the tools. But if it doesnt work out, I'll look at nlwikibots.--v/r - TP 21:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I accidentally adapted the toolserver tools along with SoxBot's code in the process of getting the bots operational. I guess I will also place them on my page as a backup in case TParis retires and lets toolserver expire or something happens with the tools, an active copy will still be retained to avoid this from happening again.—cyberpower (Talk to Me)(Contributions) 21:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Just started reading about these issues today so please forgive me if I've misunderstood something, but Wikimedia Labs might be a good place to host this code and run the bot from. We'd also be happy to store bot code in the Wikimedia source code repository as a Git project (we're switching to Git soon; summary at this blog entry). You can ask Coren about their experience with moving the Coren bot to Labs; I believe it's been moved and now happily lives in Wikimedia Labs.

Also, you might want to know about some upcoming MediaWiki & Wikimedia developers' events, where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, extending functionality with JavaScript, the new Lua templating system, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing. Best wishes! Sumanah (talk) 13:23, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hey again. I see you're still dealing with that Taliban crew— I'm quite impressed, I would've bailed long ago. But I happened to notice this, and thought it's a great idea (and unfortunately necessary). I'd be happy to help you and Magog out if you need any diffs of tendentious editing. Regards, Nightw 18:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you ... what a pleasure ... This guy was an involved party at the Taliban discussion, judging the supposed competence or lack thereof of other editors, hardly qualifies for any such task. What a timing to bring this back up, now that issues are being resolved in a different manner and by different very capable administrators. JCAla (talk) 19:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I was not impressed by Darkness Shines and TopGun's latest block, but I think we're still skirting below the sanctions like, thanks for the offer. JCAla: involved editors may ask for sanctions on other editors and help put diffs together. Uninvolved editors are needed to close discussions and use administrative tools.--v/r - TP 19:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

So you haven't yet decided whether the request will actually be made? Nightw 22:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Well it's Magog's request but I'm behind him if he pushes it forward. Magog would be completely justified no matter what the trio would come here and say. However, they've all said several times they want to try to work out the content issues without getting personnal. I've yet to see extensive long-term committment to this, but they're trying.--v/r - TP 22:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

That's good. I'd support it too since these three seem to just be examples. It's a contentious area to edit in, and it's surely seen more than its fair share of POV-pushers. Nightw 00:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Unless you can come up with any recent "evidence", I strongly advise you to stop terming my editing. JCAla (talk) 08:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

JCAla, evidence of poor behavior in the topic area does not have to be recent. The evidence can cover a longer term and only recent diffs are needed to prove it is still ongoing. At least in the case of Darkness Shines and TopGun; this is true. Previous blocks do not wipe the slate clean as blocks are preventative, not punative. If a collection of diffs were to stretch back to last November, that would sufficiently cover the topic area and all editors in it to prove that it is a contentious area and topic sanctions are needed. Have you read Wikipedia:DIGWUREN? These are the kind of sanctions we're talking about.--v/r - TP 13:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

If something isn't ongoing, any actions such as the ones proposed would be purely punative and inappropriate - besides sending a very wrong message. I gave Wikipedia:DIGWUREN a look and that case isn't really applicable since it includes things such as alleged hacking, etc., another story. JCAla (talk) 18:35, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear TParis,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and

Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's

Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we

teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community,

and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what

you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community

[[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_82#Learn_to_be_a_Wikipedia_Administrator_-

_New_class_at_MSU|HERE]], where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my

students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training,

motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one

of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of

communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)

• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will

never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.

• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an

interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.

• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics

review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have

been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak

with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I

will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your

name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be

more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 21:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. I've already added my name to the list, so feel free to contact me by email or IRC when you are ready.--v/r - TP 22:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Mediation

Please review "Listing of Schools offering D.B.A. degrees." This section was unilaterally removed from the article's main body without discussion where it had been for years. Individual making deletion refuses to even allow list to be in talk section. I feel that the list should be returned to the article's main body or at least be available in the Talk section. I don't want to start and edit war. Please mediate and advise.

Talk:Doctor_of_Business_Administration

--A. Poinçot (talk) 00:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi, stick around for a minute.--v/r - TP 00:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. First off, good job on you to seek mediation rather than edit war over the content. Unfortunately, User:ElKevbo is quite right that our talk page guidelines do specify that talk pages are for discussing about the article, not the subject of the article. And the list really doesn't belong on the article itself. If you seek a third party to publish it, it still likely will be denied publication on the article unless the source is a reliable source. I strongly suggest that you just drop the issue. What you want just isn't in line with what Wikipedia wants and that's what we call a conflict of interest. Sorry it's not the answer you were hoping for, but I hope I've clarified why.--v/r - TP 00:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to review the issue and to offer your option. It's appreciated. --A. Poinçot (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Jaume Cañellas Galindo

Hey TParis, I just closed this DRV, which you opened a few days ago. You were unclear about what you expected DRV to do, and as best as I can tell you were asking for an evaluation of the subject's notability and the reliability of the article's sources. That's pretty much exactly what AfD is for. You listed three editors who, it seems, want the article to be deleted. Well, if that's the case, they should open an AfD and make their arguments there. They'll probably get more participants in a discussion there, anyway. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I was looking for a review of my undeletion; but fair enough.--v/r - TP 23:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)