User talk:JHunterJ/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Glad to have your thoughts back

[1] :) -- Natalya 13:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't figure I'd be able to stay away too long. :-) -- JHunterJ (talk) 15:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:LessHeard vanU#Not really a winner...

I would appreciate you looking at this. Abtract (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you do need to look at it given that you're mentioned - particularly, the first paragraph. Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we're heading towards finalizing a remedy here, if you wouldn't mind looking at the end part of User_talk:LessHeard_vanU#Is_this_or_any_proposal_going_to_be_agreed.2C_or_imposed.3F. -- Natalya 19:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woodstock update

See Wikipedia:Requested_moves#3_September_2008. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 23:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chrome

Howdy. I was just wondering why you reverted the change away from the exact title? (Chrome (browser) redirects to Google Chrome. Almost all Category:Google services are named in the "Google ..." format). Much thanks for your oversight keeping the page as a whole clean over the last few days, I was just confused by this one edit. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exact titles are not preferred. Preference is given to links (direct or redirect) that match the dab title. If someone reaches Chrome by entering "chrome" in the search box and they're looking for the browser, Chrome (browser) would be the closest hit for them. If they reach Chrome by entering "google chrome" in the search box, well, something went really wrong. :-) See WP:MOSDAB#Piping and redirects. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, good nuance. Thanks :) -- Quiddity (talk) 23:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Underground

I was wondering why you reverted all my edits to Underground. I see the reason for some of them, but the second bullet at WP:DABMOS#Individual entries says "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link. To avoid confusing the reader, do not wikilink any other words in the line." (The bolded text is bolded in the manual.) To me, this means that if the item being referred to has a link of its own, then the author/genre/location/whatever doesn't get a separate one. Do you see it differently? Thanks. Auntof6 (talk) 19:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct; I was reverting to the version tagged for cleanup, in order to restore the proper formatting of the titles. Yes, the multiple blue links per line needs to be cleaned up (again), and I think the links in the top section need to be checked too. -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I'll go back and redo at least the multiple-blue-link things. Auntof6 (talk) 19:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restrictions on editing of articles between Abtract (talk · contribs), and Collectonian (talk · contribs) and Sesshomaru (talk · contribs)

Important Notice These restrictions are imposed upon the above named editors, and are not subject to amendment without agreement of a majority of the "involved administrators".

Abtract, as one party, and Collectonian and Sesshomaru, as the other parties, are banned from interacting with, or, directly or indirectly, commenting on each other on any page in Wikipedia. Should either account violate their bans, they may be blocked for up to one week. After the fifth such violation, the maximum block length shall be increased to one month. (Note - this remedy may be expanded in scope to include interaction of any other user if it is later deemed necessary in the opinion of 3 administrators to prevent harassment.)
A division between both parties of future work on disambituation pages may be agreed, at a neutral venue such as one of the involved admins talkpages, but otherwise the above restrictions apply.
The editors are already aware of the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle, and are reminded that edit-warring has a disruptive and detrimental effect on Wikipedia. Should either user edit-war in the future, they may be subject to further sanctions (including wider revert limitations, blocks and bans).

Involved administrators are LessHeard vanU (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), Natalya (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), and JHunterJ (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) who should act with due notice to all the other parties. Other admins are welcome to add their names to the above, and comments by any other party is welcome.

The discussion relating to the drafting of the above restriction (adapted by LessHeard vanU from the original - and revision - by Ncmvocalist (talk · contribs)) can be found here.

LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

+ + + + +

I trust that you are happy to be one of the 3... LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am. Thanks. -- JHunterJ (talk) 23:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you would cast your eye over this...

Sesshomaru has brought up this matter (and subsequent edits), which Abtract comments as being a revert to S's previous edit. Notwithstanding this might be regarded as a good faith action, this is possibly contrary to the intent of the restriction; that both sides should avoid areas in which the other edits. I have already been responding to various comments in respect of the restriction, and wonder if you would care to look into this one matter? LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on User talk:LessHeard vanU#My comment goes unanswered. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks in Disambiguation pages

Re Thomas Wright Would it not be better to leave the redlinks in place and uncommented out as a spur to development? I often create pages when I see redlinks. --Michael C. Price ^talk 21:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. It would be better to put redlinks in articles. Disambiguation pages disambiguate existing articles, and are navigational pages, not articles. This has been discussed several times at WT:D and WT:MOSDAB, and the consensus is to disambiguate articles only. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers -- but the policy does not seem to be as mandatory as you suggest. Redlinks are not banned, if I've read them correctly, but must not dominate exclusively. --Michael C. Price ^talk 06:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Each entry must contain exactly one blue link, a link to an article about the entry or that at least mentions the entry with an explanation. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abtract and Collectonian

Please see User talk:LessHeard vanU#Abtract.2C Again. Any comments appreciated. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ewa (district)

How do you recommend dealing with two districts in two different countries? Although the article hasn't been created yet, would Ewa (Nauru district) and Ewa (Hawaii district) work for you? I think we should try to avoid using the okina in titles due to browser limitations. Viriditas (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There wouldn't be any need to retarget the current Ewa (district) redirect. A new article on the Hawaiian district could become Ewa (Hawaii district) or just 'Ewa or 'Ewa District (to match the other 'Ewa places in Hawaii). Yes, the okina itself should be avoided. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7

Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 18:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Self redirect

Thank you for that explanation. Biruitorul ^Talk 20:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People's Park again

This was reviewed in late April as the primary topic. Any chance you can take a look again? Several editors are trying to change the name and redirect People's Park to a dab page. See Talk:People's_Park#Requested_move. I don't think anything has changed; it is still the primary topic. Viriditas (talk) 16:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I weighed in there. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ghafurov: how to disambiguate?

Hi, we have three instances of Ghafurov (all in Tajikistan): Ghafurov, the town; Ghafurov district; and Bobojon Ghafurov, the historian. I thought of moving Ghafurov to a new page, Ghafurov (town), and creating a three-way disambig switch under Ghafurov. But I have noticed that you like to check incoming link frequencies before disambiguating. I don't know how to do that, so could you please check the link frequencies for these three pages and advise me on the best disambiguation scheme? Many thanks. --Zlerman (talk) 00:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Zlerman! Incoming links are just checked by "What links here" to the base name -- there are, however, only a handful of incoming wikilinks to Ghafurov. Traffic (from http://stats.grok.se/) is another data point: Ghafurov district and Bobojon Ghafurov each get more traffic that Ghafurov, but in this case that doesn't indicate much -- the readers going to those articles obviously aren't going through the base name. Two other bits specific to this set though: Bobojon Ghafurov is a surname-holder; there's no danger in anyone ever thinking that article was going to be called just "Ghafurov". And both the district and the person are already linked from the city. So I think the two best approaches would be:

Leave the city at the base name and add a {{two other uses||the district|Ghafurov district|the historian|Bobojon Ghafurov}} hatnote to it, which produces:
Move the city to Ghafurov (city) and create a dab for the city & district at the base name (and put the surname-holder on that page in a "see also" section).

and bring it up at Talk:Ghafurov to see if any other editors have a feeling about the primary topic. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your tremendous help. I think I will first try approach 1 as less "invasive". Regards, --Zlerman (talk) 11:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OWN

Please keep your claims to own WP:MOSDAB off my userpage. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No such claims made -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding User:Pmanderson

(S)he seems to have violated the spirit of 3RR here. How do we deal with this guy? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed a request to avoid slow edit warring on Pmanderson's page, but otherwise we continue to let the RfC play out. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gonzo

Thanks for fixing it up. Just a question: should we really be using GONZO instead of Gonzo (studio)? It's just that on Bleach (disambiguation), the item Bleach (manga) is utilized over BLEACH. How do we go about this? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, "Gonzo (studio)" can be substituted for "GONZO". -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Can you delete Talk:Gonzo (disambiguation)? I disagree with this, the obvious need to get rid of the talk page is "cleanup". Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And could you erase Talk:School (band)? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything deleteable about them. -- JHunterJ (talk) 23:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Koavf and disambig

I'm not entirely comfortable with Koavf's article title disambigs, although I'll gladly let it rest if you find it acceptable. For example, what do you think of Evolution (Stephen Baxter book)? It seems unnecessarily long. Shouldn't Stephen Baxter, Baxter, or just 2003 book suffice? Viriditas (talk) 03:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"novel" would suffice and is the usual disambiguator for novels. I performed the move. -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. I neglected to inform you that there is already another novel, Evolution (Doctor Who), as you are now aware. Wouldn't (year novel) work better for this dab? Viriditas (talk) 12:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was no Evolution (novel) before I performed the move, so it's "available" for this use. The two articles have unique titles and are "findable" from the dab page. (year novel) is only needed if there's already a (novel) article. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for fixing it. Viriditas (talk) 03:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undo on Wizard dab

Re this edit If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary rather than using only the default message. Disambiguation page "Wizard" should include pages that are titled "Wizard (disambiguator)". OTOH, pages that simply include the word Wizard should be listed at "See also", if at all. If you disagree with the edit, let me know how, but don't use the undo function for edits that aren't vandalism. Cheers! -- JHunterJ (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice, I've commented there.

"...don't use the undo function for edits that aren't vandalism."

This would seem to be incorrect guidance. Check out Help:Reverting#Undo.

That said, I agree that use of edit summaries are typically useful. In this case, I thought the reason for the UNDO was clear, else I would have clarified further. My apologies for any confusion. - jc37 05:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Waialae

User:TShilo12 created Waialae, a new dab for WPHawaii. He has requested cleanup, and nobody knows dab pages like you do. Could you take a look when you have some free time? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 13:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Requests for arbitration#Abtract and Collectonian (and Sesshomaru)

Please note that I have made a RfAR here with you as a named party. You are invited to make a statement in respect of the request. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Veitch

Hi - could you move John Veitch (disambiguation) to John Veitch, which is now a re-direct? Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 17:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 12:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kapiolani

Found this under the radar. I'll probably get to it in a day or so, but maybe you could take a look later. Viriditas (talk) 14:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When it rains, it pours: Palace Theatre, Blue Train, and Valley of the Temples need work. Viriditas (talk) 11:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed or tagged. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An invitation to join WikiProject Ohio

Hi, you are listed under Category:Wikipedians in Ohio or one of its subcategories. WikiProject Ohio has been slowing down and we're looking for active Ohioans to turn that around! But first, let us introduce ourselves; we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Ohio and we're sure there's somewhere you'll fit in just fine. The project's departments include article quality assessment: We have over 5,000 articles to assess for class alone, newsletter writing: This has been delayed by a few months, and new page patrolling: Which has also been slowing down. We also have a newly formed taskforce on our over 1,000 townships at WP:OHTWP.

We have 132 members, many of which are not active within the project. If you are listed there and still received this message please accept the auotmated porcess's apologies. If you are interested in joining us please list you name here. If you're not interested please note this is a one time invite and you will never hear from us again.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to leave a message at our talkpage or with any member of the project, we'll be happy to answer any of your questions. We look forward to seeing you around!

Delivered by: §hepBot (Disable) 04:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go (album)

This is a toughy. Do you think it could be integrated with Go? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could change it to a set index article. I got this idea when I noticed that User:Elonka created Go (song). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merged incomplete dabs to base dab. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restrictions on editing of articles between Abtract, Collectonian and Sesshomaru

By agreement of a majority of the involved administrators, the restrictions here have been amended in the following way, and come into effect at the conclusion of this arbitration case:

Important Notice These restrictions are imposed upon the above named editors, and are not subject to further amendment without agreement of a majority of the "involved administrators".

Matters between Abtract (talk · contribs) and Collectonian (talk · contribs) shall be handled according to the restrictions/remedies enacted by the Arbitration Committee.
Abtract (talk · contribs) and Sesshomaru (talk · contribs) are banned from interacting with, or, directly or indirectly, commenting on each other on any page in Wikipedia. Should either account violate their bans, they may be blocked for up to one week. After the fifth such violation, the maximum block length shall be increased to one month. This restriction may only be enforced if violations are reported directly by either Abtract or Sesshomaru - it does not apply if violations are reported by any other editor(s).
Further remedies concerning Abtract, Collectonian and/or Sesshomaru may be enacted to include banning interactions with any other user, if it is later deemed necessary in the opinion of 3 administrators to prevent harassment.
The editors are already aware of the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle, and are reminded that edit-warring has a disruptive and detrimental effect on Wikipedia. Should any of these 3 users edit-war in the future, they may be subject to further sanctions (including wider revert limitations, blocks and bans).

Involved administrators are LessHeard vanU (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), Natalya (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), and JHunterJ (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) who should act with due notice to all the other parties. Other admins are welcome to add their names to the above, and comments by any other party is welcome.

+ + + + +

To whom it may concern, the above was discussed and agreed upon here by a majority of the involved administrators. Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abtract-Collectonian

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Abtract (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shall not interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, Collectonian, on any page in Wikipedia; harass or wikistalk Collectonian such as by editing pages that Collectonian has recently edited; or make uncivil comments about or personal attacks upon any user.

These restrictions imposed upon Abtract shall be interpreted in a reasonable fashion so as to allow Abtract to continue with appropriate editing while preventing any further harassment of Collectonian. Any attempts to "game the system" or "wikilawyer" the details of the restrictions are unwelcome. Should Abtract violate the restrictions imposed upon him, he may be blocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator, with any blocks to be logged here. Collectonian is urged to continue to avoid any unnecessary interaction with Abtract.

Furthermore, please note that the temporary injunction enacted by the Committee on October 16 in relation to this case now ceases to be in effect.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 13:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Piping and redirects

Can you comment here? We need consensus on whether redirects may be created for the sole purpose of disambiguation or not. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A similar discussion is going on over here. This time, we're discussing how we should treat the primary topic if it's a redirect. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moscow Peak

Please visit Moscow Peak and see if there is a good way of disambiguating the three peaks: the main (and most notable) giant in Tajikistan and the two smaller (and much less notable) ones in Arizona and Victoria. Bear in mind that there are no articles on the peaks in Arizona and Victoria and I doubt that they will ever be written (neither passes the notability test). Your advice will be much appreciated. Thanks. --Zlerman (talk) 10:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they are not notable enough to have or likely ever have articles, then disambiguation is not necessary -- they should just be deleted from the Moscow Peak article as non-notable. However, if they are notable enough to be listed somewhere (and I suspect that the mountain project members would think so), a set index article List of mountains named Moscow Peak or somesuch would do (and should be a "See also" from Moscow Peak. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EU (disambiguation)

The primary meaning is not formatted well here. Care to take a shot at it? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for advice

Hi. I am having problems communicating with User:Sesshomaru, and I would very much appreciate your advice on how I should proceed. I have repeatedly tried to engage him/her in discussion, on talk:Zoot, but they refuse to AGF, refuse to discuss the matter, refuse to answer any questions, and refuse to address the issues I raise. (Further, their history seems to suggest they enjoy making points and editwarring ... ) His/her edits are unpredictable and inconsistent, and he chops and changes in his decisions on which parts of the MoS he is going to follow or ignore, and when, and contradicts himself. I am attempting to discuss the matter and address the issues he raises, but I don't seem to be having any success. Further, I have made a number of compromises, but he refuses to entertain the idea of compromise. (Or even the idea of discussion, for that matter.)
Relevant pages are:

I would very much appreciate your advice on how I should proceed.
With thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Having thought about it overnight, I came to the conclusion that attempting to communicate with User:Sesshomaru seems to be a pointless exercise, so I'm not going to devote any further effort to it. Never-the-less, should you wish to provide advice and/or comments, I will read it with interest. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abtract

Given the relevance to Abtract, and potentially to the Abtract-Collectonian case or the restrictions between Abtract and Sesshomaru, wanted to notify you of something on the WP:RFArb page - please see my note under "Request to amend prior case: Alastair Haines". Cheers, Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lion (disambiguation) and Lion (name)

Would you mind taking a gander at these? After the splitting, these may need some adjustments. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]