User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2010/January

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Islamic Azad University of Majlesi

Thank you very much for your suggestions. I will try to improve my article as soon as possible.--Isfahani (talk) 13:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I am very happy to see your suggestion in order to improve my work. I should mention that I have the permission to use the images. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isfahani (talk • contribs) 16:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, as I'm sure you'll appreciate, we can't just accept "I have permission" as proof of permission! However, if you read Commons:Licensing, that explains the licensing which is suitable (see the section Acceptable licenses), as well as details of the law in different countries. If you contact the University (assuming they are the copyright owner of the pictures), using one of the templates at Commons:Email_templates, they can grant permission for the images to be used on Commons. However, do ensure that they carefully read the licensing for use on Commons and Wikipedia! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Look on RfA

Just another question about RfA, what do you think is a good percentage of auto edits in an RfA Canidate? --MWOAP (talk) 00:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, I am now using huggle. --MWOAP (talk) 00:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
There are no really good indication for this - as I state on User:Phantomsteve/RfA standards, if I saw a candidate with more than 70% automated edits, I would be inclined to oppose, if 60-70% I'd be inclined to be neutral and if less than 60% I'd be inclined to support. (For information, I have 52.01% while yours is currently 42.56% - obviously, if you use Huggle a lot, that'll go up dramatically!)
Please note that I say that I'd be inclined to be... - it's not a major criteria, it's one I look at. If someone had 100,000 edits, 75% of which were automated, but the remaining 25,000 were to consist of 15,000 high-quality article edits (inclding creating several GAs and FAs) and 10,000 "admin-area" edits (SD noms, PRODs, AfDs, ANIs, etc) then the automated edits would not be a big issue - if on the other hand, someone had 1,000 edits, 75% of which were automated, with the remaining 250 edits were all minor edits (correcting a typo) and on their own user pages, then it'd be more of an issue!
If you have any other questions, feel free to ask! Oh, and Happy New Year! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Coaching

Hey. Sorry for the delay – between my RfB and the holidays I didn't get much time on-wiki over the past month. I'll get back to your coaching program in due course. –Juliancolton | Talk 06:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Julian - Happy New Year! Firstly, sorry about the RfB... who'd have thought that someone who had two 200+ support RfBs would still not get it? I'll be honest, although I feel the standard is a bit too high for RfBs, I've got to agree that the 'crat discussion yielded the correct result according to the current standards. Hopefully, it'll be third time lucky, eh?
With regards to coaching - I wasn't expecting much to happen during the last 2-3 weeks, with the holidays an'all! I've not been as active as normal because of the holidays (and a lot of what I have done seems to be connected with the Wiki Greek Basketball situation!
I'm back to normal Wikipedia-ing from Monday evening (i.e. Monday-Friday evening on Wikipedia a lot, Friday evening-Monday morning on a little bit, as I spend the time with my partner and kids) - so perhaps we can carry on with the coaching next week!
Chat soon, regards -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I thought you hated me?

Does this mean you hate me yes or no?Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 21:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

No one hates you, WGB. You may have been a bit of a pain recently, but you are a good editor. You do good work on articles. That is far more important to creating the encyclopedia that is Wikipedia than being an admin!
They call being an admin "getting the mop" - it's a caretaker's job. OK, it is required, in the same way that a research laboratory needs a caretaker who will sort out the cleaning up — but it's not the job that the highly intelligent scientists do, is it?
Not everyone is suited for adminship — in the same way that not everyone is good at writing articles. For example, although I think I'm not too bad at tidying up articles, I've only created one significant article, and significantly expanded one other!
Everyone on Wikipedia needs to work to their strengths. It's a sign of maturity and intelligence if you can work out what your strengths are, and to use them — that is true on Wikipedia as much as it is in The Real World!
Anyway, I've got to get back to what I was working on before — but no, I don't hate you. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I have 112 articles created here. But even with this I was insulted, ridiculed, patronized, mocked, by all those people that I "never contributed or did anything worthy to be an admin". This just shows how this site needs many, many changes. I still want to start a new site project and begin changing how the site makes these decisions.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Name (with diffs) someone who said that you had never contributed? Ditto with someone who said that you "never did anything worthy to be an admin"? I saw plenty of people who acknowledged your good article work.
In all the discussions, I saw a lot of people who offered you helpful advice (both on your RfAs, in ANI and on your talk page). I saw a lot of editors who were probably getting fed up with what could be perceived as childish tantrums for not getting your own way.
You can choose to ignore what I am about to say, but I'm going to say it anyway: you are not ready to be an admin at this site. An admin needs to be able to put up with being criticised. They need to be able to argue intelligently and coherantly, without resorting to saying things like "Why are people doing this?" or "I don't understand what I've done wrong" or "Why are people insulting me?". In all the discussions (RfA and ANI), I only saw one statement that I considered to be uncivil (when Coffee told you to shut your trap, or however he phrased it) - but then again, you had been very insulting to him, and accusing him of all sorts of things. I don't agree with everything Coffee says or does, but I have a lot of respect for him, and I can understand why he told you to be quiet — in fact, I feel that he was doing you a favour in doing so, as you were ignoring others who said the same thing more politely. I believe that he just put it more bluntly than others had — so although it sounds rude, I think that it was with good intentions.
An admin needs to be able to do more than just create and edit articles. They need to have a deep understanding of the main policies at this site — those about deletion, protection and blocking especially. You have not shown evidence that you understand those policies. On your talk page, I gave you some RfA type questions, but you chose to ignore them.
Nowhere in the documentation on adminship does it say that creating and editing articles is enough. I strongly suggest that during the next few months, you read the advice I gave you on your talk page (see here for reading matter — look at the section Yet more unsolicited advice!).
I am now going to get on with other important stuff — like getting something to eat! Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Phantomsteve. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MWOAP.
Message added 22:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

answered questions MWOAP (talk) 22:17, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Phantomsteve. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MWOAP.
Message added 00:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

re'd, please take a look MWOAP (talk) 00:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

GA review for William Stanley (Victorian inventor)

I've left the start of a review on the talk page of the article. Normally, I would have been inclined to fail the article because there are a number of large prose and prose flow issues, but this is apparantly your first GA nomination and it's taken two months for a review to happen, so I've put the article on hold and we can work together to get the article up to GA standards. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:NAC

You missed a step at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Isonomia - [1]. Hipocrite (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Much appreciated -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion Page for proposed Continental Mediterranean Climate/Mediterranean Climate merge

Thanks a lot for fixing this! I didn't know what the heck I was doing.(G. Capo (talk) 00:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC))

No worries! I came across the incorrect THIS PAGE entry, and thought I should help out! We all make mistakes - this one was easy to fix! Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

a shining (barn)star

File:1RXS J160929.1-210524 b.jpg The shining (barn)star
For as long as I can remember, you've been the person answering my questions at WP:Help Desk. This distant (barn)star shines in honor of your service; little else has been working so tirelessly. Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 01:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

(The proper generic might have been the "working man's barnstar", but I prefer to use barnstars of my own design ...)

Thank you very much for that File:Blush.png - and I like personal barnstars, as it shows the giver's personality more! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Just a teeny, weeny reminder...

...to substitute help desk templates rather than transclude. Thanks.  – ukexpat (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

oops! Thanks for reminding me - I normally remember! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:

Whatever you decide is fine by me. -- m:drini 23:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:45, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

MrWiki and restrictions

Sure, go ahead. Add it. DS (talk) 01:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

RfD nomination of " Naxalbari National Heritage Academy"

I have nominated " Naxalbari National Heritage Academy" (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — the Man in Question (in question) 10:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Phantomsteve. You have new messages at MWOAP's talk page.
Message added 23:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have a personal request to you on this page. And I am back. MWOAP (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Service awards proposal

Master Editor Hello, Phantomsteve/Archives/2010/January! I noticed you display a service award, and would like to invite you to join the discussion over a proposed revamping of the awards.

If you have any opinions on the proposal, please participate in the discussion. Thanks! — the Man in Question (in question) 07:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Editor review

Hi Steve! I noticed that you had provided good-quality and well-structured editor reviews over at WP:ER. If it's not too much trouble, would you please be able to take a look at my request? As I've noticed that your reviews tend to be among the most well-structured I'm just hoping mine doesn't get left out or anything :) Thanks! JulieSpaulding (talk) 15:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words! I notice that your request was only added today, and as a general rule I try to do reviews for the oldest, unreviewed requests. I have done a couple of "newer" reviews last week, as the editors had few edits (less than 500). However, I am hoping to do some reviews next week - at the bare minimum the 3 oldest unreviewed requests which have been waiting for almost a month. I hope to do more than that, but realistically, I probably won't be able to do your review - but I want to do a blitz over the next couple of weeks. Hopefully some other editors will also do some! Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
That's OK :) I'm sure someone else will take up my request in time. JulieSpaulding (talk) 13:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Islamic Azad University of Majlesi logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Islamic Azad University of Majlesi logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

RfA thankspam

A piano keyboard encompassing 1 octave Hello, Phantomsteve/Archives/2010! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice.
KV5 (Talk • Phils)

Signing (using history) for archiving purposes RFA thankspam left by Killervogel5 (talk · contribs) 03:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!

File:Wikisanta-no motto.png

LouriePieterse is wishing you Happy Christmas! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Yuletide, Litha, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukkah, Kwanzaa, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

"The greatest gift they'll get this year is life." ~ Bob Geldof & Midge Ure

Spread the hugs & cheer by adding {{subst:User:Deliriousandlost/happy christmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

Signed for archiving purposes (using history) left by Deliriousandlost (talk · contribs) 23:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Leave me alone

I am sick of constantly being harassed and criticized by people like you. Please leave me alone. I have had enough if it. I am just editing articles and am still being followed. Just stop it now.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 11:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

  • I am not harassing you: I am explaining what the expectations on Wikipedia are. This kind of thing (not listening to advice, failing to follow the expectations on Wikipedia, this "leave me alone, you are harassing me") is part of the reason why you failed your RfA and why I cannot see you succeeding on an RfA in the foreseeable future. In the past, I told you that if you ever have any questions in the future to contact me - I'm withdrawing this offer, as you do not pay attention to what people say to you unless they are agreeing with you - and I am only willing to help someone who will actually pay attention even (or especially) if it is not necessarily what they want to hear. Continue with your useful edits, but try to remember to use edit summaries and page previews. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:30, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Just to say I appreaciate you not objecting to the un-indenting, its good so see folk being reasonable after the way some act on here. FeydHuxtable (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

No problems! I'm always open to reasonable comments, and your reason for un-indenting was logical and in line with procedure. Also, for the closing 'crat, the note that the user was blocked is shown, so they can take that into consideration. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Shubinator's DYKcheck Script

Hi

I really hope you don't mind me troubling you about this. I saw on the Did You Know nomination page that you talked about the above script and I thought it might be of use to me as I've just nominated an article for the DYK and want to know if it's long enough.

I've tried importing the scripts to my monobook js file, saved it, bypassed my browser cache, but nothing has changed! I'm told I should see a DYK symbol when I go into article space on the left hand side of the tool bar but I'm honestly seeing nothing different and I don't know what I'm doing wrong. I've asked at the village technical thing as well but nobody there has any ideas either! In case it's important I'm using Firefox.

Before I completely give up on importing it, any idea what I'm doing wrong? --5 albert square (talk) 03:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi 5 albert square. OK, here's what I think:
  1. Have you read the documentation at User:Shubinator/DYKcheck?
  2. As far as I am aware, it works in Firefox, but as I use IE8, I can't be sure!
  3. When you have added it to your monobook.js (which you have appeared to have done correctly from what I can see), you will not see anything unless you go to Template talk:Did you know. If you are on that page:
  1. On the left hand side (in the toolbox) you will see a link DYK check.
  2. If you click on this, the first DYK candidate will be evaluated, and a report shown above it (with size, creation details, hook length etc)
  3. If you click again, it will do the 2nd candidate, another click will do the third, etc, etc. If you do the final one of the page, clicking on DYK check will go back to the first one on the page.
I hope this clarifies how it works - if you have any other questions, please do ask! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi thanks for that Phantomsteve but I'm still not getting that option from what I can see! The options I'm getting are T:DYK, Rules, Suggestions, Disccusion, Prep Areas, Queue, Archive and Stats! I can't find anything that tells me how many words are in an article --5 albert square (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, bypassed my cache but that didn't work so manually cleared out the cache and now it's there! Thanks for your help :) --5 albert square (talk) 00:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm glad you got it sorted! My help was little, you did most of it yourself in the end! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:59, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Please reconsider

...engaging anyone who declares they are suicidal with the idea that your engaging them may be what saves them. The police have been notified. Please don't write me back or respond to this. Enough has been said. Nothing should be distracting a suicidal person from getting the professional help they need, particularly not an on-going discussion with them or about them on wikipedia. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 21:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Aye

Responded with more a bit more homework! –Juliancolton | Talk 05:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Answer

Xeno is probably right; a silly question from Keepscases is almost tradition, but too many and I start to look like I don't take RFA seriously. Still, the answer to your question is: "I don't know. I'm old, but I'm not that old." Thanks for the support. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't going to comment but since a section is made for it: the question from Keepscases gave some room for critical commentary/independant thought; the question from Phantomsteve did not. It was just pure fluff. That stuff is ok 5 or 6 days in, but not less than an hour after transclusion. –xenotalk 17:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Well, I wouldn't expect you to know the answer... even my Dad doesn't know the answer to that one - not that he's old, oh no! (Hmm it's a good job he doesn't live anywhere near me, and doesn't know how to find this page!) I wouldn't want to look like it's not a serious RfA, so I have no problems with Xeno removing it. To be honest, the song was playing here, and I was reading the previous question, and thought "why not?"! Anyway, good luck with the RfA. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding. And sorry to be a crotchety old curmudgeon, but if you support a candidate (especially when you do so very early on), it's kindof peculiar to still ask them a battery of questions. –xenotalk 21:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Richard of Salerno

In the discussion page about Richard of Salerno I wrote that him and his cousin Richard of Hauteville were two different historical figures, you can have proof of it from the same source reported in the article (Beech, George. A Norman-Italian Adventurer in the East: Richard of Salerno, 1993; [2]); the source tells lot of discrepancy from the same article in wikipedia: a different date of birth, a different father (William of the Principate). The current article is the resulting of the merging of the life of both. So I will proceed tho edit the article about the first Richard and to undo your edit about the second one. Thank you for your attention and please write to me if you need some other explanation.---kayac71- (talk) 21:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that you had written on the talk page on the 9th January, but that as yet there had been no response to this. I also noticed that the details on Richard of Hauteville were exactly the same as that of Richard of Salerno, which was why I created the redirect.
What I am going to do is to move the old version of Richard of Hauteville to your user space at User:-kayac71-/Richard of Hauteville so that you can work on it. When you have completed it, we can sort out getting it moved back (that will require an admin, I think, and I'm not one of those!). I trust that this will be a suitable solution while you work on the Hauteville article. I will also add a message on the talk page of Richard of Salerno directing editors to your page. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I will start very soon, thank you. ---kayac71- (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for being understanding! I have left the message on the Richard of Salerno page referring to your draft. You might also want to leave a message about it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Middle Ages, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography - that will enable more people to know about it, and perhaps get more knowledgeable people (i.e. not me!) helping you. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

My ER

Thanks for the review! It's pretty clear that I have improved since my first review in June of '08. You are always welcome to review/analyze my contributions. Schfifty3 22:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

A very silly simple question I hope you can answer:

How do I use the IRC comunications on wikipedia? I mean, esch time I click on a related link, the computes says me that It can´t find the appropriate program to run. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 00:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I use a program called mIRC - but that costs money to buy! Others I know use Chatzilla (but some don't think much of it), Pidgin, XChat or Freenode Webchat (that'll open it to Wikipedia Help chat). Also, you can get a list of them at Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients. I've quickly looked at Pidgin, Xchat and Webchat - they all seem OK, but it was only for a couple of mins each! Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Navbox problems at the Help Desk

Sorry, I'm still confused; can you try to help again? Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 03:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

American Technologies Network Corporation

I noticed you had a lengthy discussion on this, and I agree with you on the deletion. I don't see any substantial fixes by the author, so I'm nominating. Any feedback is appreciated. Joshua Scott (talk) 07:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I've PROD2'd it, as I agree with the proposed deletion. I've also commented on the talk page, both about the last comment from the creator as well as the PROD. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: scripts not working

Hi! Some of the errors you've encountered (amelvand, picmark) are likely from changes to Wikipedia skin HTML since they've last been updated (possibly some time ago). Both scripts now seem to work on Firefox 3.5.6 and Google Chrome 4.0.249.43. Unfortunately there's no Windows readily accessible from this computer, so I can't test it on IE (your errors seem to be formatted like that), but if your errors persist, I'll see what I can do (perhaps on the VM front). GracenotesT § 00:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Pictor
Los Angeles Convention Center
Musca
Puppis
Indus (constellation)
Seka
Tikkabilla
Refraction (metallurgy)
United States Civil Service Commission
Tucana
Volans
Reticulum
Telescopium
Horologium
Holloway
Columba (constellation)
Gamecock
Voice User Interface
Bawn
Cleanup
Interactive voice response
VAIO
Dell Latitude
Merge
Judith Miller
Obscenity
Republic of Texas (group)
Add Sources
1688
Georgi Beregovoi
Predictive dialer
Wikify
SEX (boutique)
Desborough School
Joint Rescue Coordination Centers
Expand
47 Ursae Majoris
SO-DIMM
Queueing theory

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: scripts not working

Hi! Some of the errors you've encountered (amelvand, picmark) are likely from changes to Wikipedia skin HTML since they've last been updated (possibly some time ago). Both scripts now seem to work on Firefox 3.5.6 and Google Chrome 4.0.249.43. Unfortunately there's no Windows readily accessible from this computer, so I can't test it on IE (your errors seem to be formatted like that), but if your errors persist, I'll see what I can do (perhaps on the VM front). GracenotesT § 00:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Pictor
Los Angeles Convention Center
Musca
Puppis
Indus (constellation)
Seka
Tikkabilla
Refraction (metallurgy)
United States Civil Service Commission
Tucana
Volans
Reticulum
Telescopium
Horologium
Holloway
Columba (constellation)
Gamecock
Voice User Interface
Bawn
Cleanup
Interactive voice response
VAIO
Dell Latitude
Merge
Judith Miller
Obscenity
Republic of Texas (group)
Add Sources
1688
Georgi Beregovoi
Predictive dialer
Wikify
SEX (boutique)
Desborough School
Joint Rescue Coordination Centers
Expand
47 Ursae Majoris
SO-DIMM
Queueing theory

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi :)

Hi :) I had recently requested for being allowed to help out in the account creation process for new users, through the ACC interface. I did leave a message on my talk page (as advised by the instructions), but till now haven't heard from the ACC team. Would you be able to guide me on how to get it done? Also Steve, if possible, could you tell me what all to do to qualify for rollback rights? Thanks ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 12:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Would it be possible for you to leave the reply on my talk page? Thanks again ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 12:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

  • gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and
  • ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Important notice about VOTE 3 in the CDA poll

You are receiving this message as you have voted in VOTE 3 at the Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll.

It has been pointed out that VOTE 3 was confusing, and that voters have been assuming that the question was about creating an actual two-phase CDA process. The question is merely about having a two-phase poll on CDA at the eventual RfC, where the community will have their vote (eg a "yes/no for CDA” poll, followed a choice of proposal types perhaps).

As I wrote the question, I'll take responsibility for the confusion. It does make sense if read through to the end, but it certainly wasn't as clear as it should have been, or needed to be!

Please amend your vote if appropriate - it seems that many (if not most) people interpreted the question in the way that was not intended.

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Bwilkins

Thanks for understanding, (or at least trying to understand), the rationale behind my ¬vote. Hopefully Bwilkins will prove me wrong by moving on to become an excellent administrator in every respect. Admittedly, it wouldn't be the first time. Regards, decltype (talk) 13:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

And thank you for taking my comments in the spirit in which they were given - seeking further explanation, rather than as a criticism. Although I disagree with your !vote, I do understand where you are coming from! I sometimes will ask someone to expand on their comment, as it is entirely possible that they may have seen something in the candidate's history which I might have missed. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

ER

Oh! I knew I was missing something.... I never actually realized where the asterisk was (I somehow only saw the one at the bottom). Thanks for telling me!  fetchcomms☛ 13:45, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

New proposal

Hi Steve, remember the new proposal I had discussed with you on my talk page? I've posted it in the Village Pump here. Do give your views whenever possible. Thanks ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 04:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

uploading photo

hello thanks a lot for your valued contribution and corrections. I am new to wiikipedia and hence am making mistakes. sorry for them. i would like to know how do i upload the photo along with some info, which is usually found in the box on the right hand side. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupendrafest (talk • contribs) 17:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

  • If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
  • If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

can't really put the box for the photo...isn't there a default box, which i could fill up with the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupendrafest (talk • contribs) 17:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

You need to use an infobox for that. I'll start one later! By the way, when you leave a message on a talk page (never on an article), you can sign and date it by putting ~~~~ at the end of your comment. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Test from alternative account

This is just a quick test. -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\[alternate account of Phantomsteve] 17:30, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I hope i am doing this right, forgive me if so

I have responded to you on my "talk" page. I have made many mistakes thus far, yet am learning. i am unsure as to whether or not you received my message back to you and I apologize for any misunderstandings. I think that the message is posted to my talk page. Thank you for your kindness and helpful advice. --Ladybrainbypass (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about making mistakes! Obviously, try to avoid them, but you won't break the wiki! Even if you make mistakes, they are easilyy remedied. As I mentioned on the help page, if you go to WP:ADOPT it will tell you how to get adopted (or alternatively, go to Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area which explains more about the idea behind adoption. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


Thank you

I'm signing up to be mentored, for sure. You've been very helpful and if you have any further advice, then please feel free to share.

Also, if you run across a submission with no reliable sources, based in opinion, contains slander against particular groups of people, and even may contain unfinished sentences which fail to state the facts, etc.

Should such a submission be reported due to violations of this website, discussed amongst peers, help offered, or what is your opinion hypothetically speaking-- If you were to stumble upon this hate-fueled style article-- What would you personally chose o do in response?

Thanks again//--Ladybrainbypass (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Exactly what I would do would depend on the type of article, but as a general rule, anything which is unsourced, or not written using a neutral point of view or is slanderous should be removed immediately. If it's just part of the article, then just the offending section(s) should be removed. If it's the entire article, and it is slanderous, then you can replace the whole article's content with the tag {{db-attack}} and an admin will come along and delete it. If it is possible to just remove part of the article, then do so (make sure that in the edit summary you explain what you have done.
If the kind of material that needs to be removed personally identifies someone (gives their address, phone number, etc), then I would follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight to ask for this information to be permanently removed from the article's history (even when you remove it, it stays in the history, so can still be seen if someone looks at an old version).
If you come across this situation, and don't feel that you are sure about dealing with it, you can either leave me a message, or use {{helpme}} or {{adminhelp}} - someone on IRC will respond quickly. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barack Obama condolences

I saw it myself when it was new and thought of SNOWing it, but decided to leave it for a more experienced admin to be on the safe side. I'd have closed it when it expired, but I'm beginning to realise that my timezone puts timely AfD closures and good sleeping habits somewhat at odds! Olaf Davis (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I only came across it because the creator had left a message on the Help Desk asking for help with another article (Samuel Zoll - which was a bit untidy, but has been tidied up a bit now). I looked at their contribs and saw the AfD!
Oh by the way, I meant to say before, but your answers to my questions on your RfA were good! I especially like the answer to the question about the content dispute - a trick question, where you neatly avoided the wrong answer! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

... for withdrawing your question. I have myself debated the merits of such questions, and till recently I used to argue that such questions are justifiable since communication and clear thinking are desirable qualities in an admin. But in practice I notice that irrespective of how the candidate answers such a question, it results in numerous opposes of the sort "Oppose I cannot countenance an admin who thinks this way" or "who takes X lightly" etc. This is understandable given how passions on a current controversy are necessarily high, but unfair to the candidate in my opinion. Thanks for your taking my recommendation into account. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 21:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I was in the middle of withdrawing the same question on the other RfA, but my browser crashed! I am now going to do it, but I saw I had a message, so I thought I'd read this first! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Incidently, I see that the other one was answered! I have strucken it out, but left the candidate the option of reverting that should they wish to. If in your opinion (as an admin) you feel that the question shouldn't be on the page, I am happy for you to remove it completely from the RfAs. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
If a candidate has already answered the question, there is no need to remove it (or strike it) unless the candidate prefers it that way (see Streisand effect). Note that your question did not break any policies, and there would be no justification at all for an administrator to remove it "by force". My recommendation at the RFA was just that; most decisions at wikipedia are arrived at by discussion and gentle persuasion, and the admin bit is only to be used to either implement consensus, or for egregious violations of policy. I hope you didn't imagine I was pulling weight as an admin in recommending the withdrawal of questions about current controversies, and that you removed it because you understand/agree with my reasoning. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I did indeed remove it as I agreed with what you had said. It wasn't until I was looking at your message above that I remembered that you were an admin! I didn't think that my question was against policy per se, but if it was then I would have had no objection to it being removed! Anyway, it's in the hands of the candidate to decide what to do with it, as that it what I put there! (puts on best Yul Brynner voice): "So it is written, so it shall be done" -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Additional references for "Singapore International Energy Week" Wiki entry

Dear Phantomsteve, I am a colleague of Aaron, the wiki user who has been working with you on the Singapore International Energy Week (SIEW) Wiki entry. I was looking through the entry and was wondering if you'd like to consider including the following articles as additional references to the write-up.

The Jakarta Globe Fast-Track Focus On Coal Power May Cost Indonesia Billions http://thejakartaglobe.com/resources/fast-track-focus-on-coal-power-may-cost-indonesia-billions/342190

Cleantech Investor Singapore: a “living lab” for clean energy research http://www.cleantechinvestor.com/portal/event-reviews/3014-singaporelivinglab.html

Enterprise Innovation Singapore takes first step towards smarter grid technology http://www.enterpriseinnovation.net/content/singapore-takes-first-step-towards-smarter-grid-technology

Celsias Energy, Peak Oil, and Development http://www.celsias.com/article/energy-peak-oil-and-development/

Insead Knowledge Climate un-changed: experts say Copenhagen conference a ‘process’, not a resolution http://knowledge.insead.edu/environment-copenhagen-conference-091203.cfm

Thank you for your time.


Matthew.lim (talk) 09:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks for this, Matthew. I have family commitments over the weekend, so I will look at this on Monday or Tuesday. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Your message on 'protects the page' versus 'semi-protects the page'

Just a note to tell you I'd missed your comment on my talk page where you'd clarified about the wording. Just saw it and thought I'd leave a thanks note. :) ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 19:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries - I should have left a pointer to it at the bottom of your talk page so you'd notice it! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

American Technologies Network Corporation (again)

Hi Phantomsteve, I just wanted to let you know that this article is being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Technologies_Network_Corporation. Joshua Scott (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

test

This template must be substituted. Replace {{User:Phantomsteve/welcome ...}} with {{subst:User:Phantomsteve/welcome ...}}. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Human Rights Believer ANI Discussion

Problem solved thankyou very much. Go and annoy someone else now. Goodbye. Human Rights Believer (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Removing the ANI discussion won't make it go away. If it is indeed not a problem, then an admin will mark it as "Resolved: No action required". If it is a problem, an admin will deal with it. Either way, you cannot "solve" the problem by removing the notice. Goodbye. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:55, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

RFA

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

ER

I'll try! I just got there a few days ago, so i'm feeling my way into it. Doc Quintana (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

  • No worries - I just thought it would only be fair to do a review if you want to add questions for the reviewee! My advice would be to do a second review for someone - look at what the original reviewer said, look at the reviewee's contributions (I use a lot of SoxRed's tools for my reviews), see if you can add anything. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah

I've been involved with the BLP debacle lately, which has occupied most of my wiki-time. Should be able to post some more tonight... –Juliancolton | Talk 01:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No rush, JC! I've seen your name in various places with the BLP discussions! Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 01:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion invitation

British Royalty Hi Phantomsteve/Archives/2010/January, I would like to invite you and anyone watching who shares an interest in moving forward constructively to a discussion about Biographies of Living People

New editors' lack of understanding of Wikipedia processes has resulted in thousands of BLPs being created over the last few years that do not meet BLP requirements. We are currently seeking constructive proposals on how to help newcomers better understand what is expected, and how to improve some 48,000 articles about living people as created by those 17,500 editors, through our proper cleanup, expansion, and sourcing.

These constructive proposals might then be considered by the community as a whole at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people.

Please help us:

Ikip 05:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC) Refactored this message a bit. thanks, hoping to hear from you. Ikip 17:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

A question

Steve, I am curious. Why haven't you applied for adminship till now? ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 12:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

A simple question, a simple answer: I am doing admin coaching. An experienced admin gives me examples of AfDs, etc, and asks how I would close them. If my answers are obviously wrong, then he would give me further guidance, but if they are OK, then he just says "they look ok to me"! As a rule, if you are doing admin coaching, your coach would generally nominate you when you both think that you are ready. There is no real rush, after all being an admin isn't really a big deal! When (if) the time is right then I will put in an RfA. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Alright. Seems logical. Best... ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 03:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
See below↓  – ukexpat (talk) 03:31, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I would just like to add that when I was answering your question, the subject of me being ready for an RfA hadn't come up - it was discussed a day or so after I replied to your question! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2010/January&oldid=1069424766"