User talk:SamB

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome!

Hello, SamB, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Flockmeal 14:34, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

{{USRD}}[edit]

Hey! I appreciate your notice of my partial conversion of {{USRD}} to {{WPBannerMeta}}, but please don't get ahead of yourself. I don't have any plans to further develop this port until the Lua version of WPBannerMeta is complete. It was more of a simple proof-of-concept test. Thanks anyway. -happy5214 17:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Lemma error[edit]

You have just moved The New Testament in the Original Greek to Wescott-Hort. But unfortunately this is not right. This edition is named after Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort so Westcott-Hort would be the right lemma or else Westcott & Hort or Westcott and Hort. I dont know what you have done besides that, but it is not possible to move it to the right lemma because there exists a redirect. So please do whatever it takes to fix the problem.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 20:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Unsourced beerware[edit]

There is an official FSF list with GPL-compatible licenses, if you find beerware there, great, add a reference, add a GPL yes, and update Comparison of free and open-source software licenses, section #Approvals, row beerware. As long as there is a no what other projects say is irrelevant. Notably Debian is also listed as no, while you claim that they approved it as GPL-compatible, something they are not entitled to do, the FSF decides it. Bring references. –Be..anyone (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

@Be..anyone: The FSF's list can hardly be expected to be complete, and in fact the FSF is NOT authoritative with respect to GPL compatibility; the FSF's silence certainly doesn't override Fedora's determination that the license is GPL compatible. (The real authority on GPL compatibility is the courts.) For DFSG, ftp-master is authoritative, but I'm not sure how to cite their acceptance of a package. In both cases, a value of "No" is wrong here; if we can't do "Yes" we should just say "?" or something. —SamB (talk) 04:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm okay with ?, because the FSF has a really unclear "informative", which might cover beerware or not. But a decisive yes for Debian would be much better. But no ? on the comparison list, that's strict, yes means listed by name. –Be..anyone (talk) 04:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Device mapper category[edit]

Hello! I've removed Device mapper category from Device mapper, dm-cache and dm-crypt articles, as it pretty much just causes unnecessary fragmentation within the Linux kernel features category. Once we have more than three articles related to the device mapper, this new category is going to fit much better. Hope you agree. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 19:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dsimic: Well, working from https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Категория:Device_mapper, I already found Linux DM Multipath, and was just trying to decide whether LVM2 or mdadm belonged in the category despite being in userspace. (Turns out mdadm doesn't really touch the device mapper stuff anyway.) —SamB (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
On second thought, there are already similar categories with only three articles (Linux kernel live patching category, for example), so I've reinstated Device mapper category within the three articles listed above. By the way, as you've noted above, device mapper and mdadm are completely unrelated. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 20:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia citation/link tools[edit]

Slash in the name of wiki pages generally means that what follows the slash is a subpage, so this naming is confusing. Why not use "and" instead of /. Also, "external" should be in the name of the category if it's supposed to be only for tools for external links. --V111P (talk) 07:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@V111P: Oh, oops, I didn't remember/realize that subpages were enabled in the category namespace. And I admit I wasn't thinking about external links when I came up with the name, though now I wonder if one of these ideas wouldn't be better:
  1. Three or four categories: Category:Wikipedia citation tools, Category:Wikipedia internal link tools, Category:Wikipedia external link tools, and perhaps Category:Wikipedia link tools as an ancestor for the other two link tool categories.
  2. Just throw it all in one category, Category:Wikipedia citation and link tools, which would be just like Category:Wikipedia citation/link tools except without the word "external".

Or if we wanted ridiculous nesting levels, we could add all five! —SamB (talk) 17:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not saying that subpages are enabled in the category namespace, I'm just saying that this naming might be a little confusing to people. As to the other question it comes down to what kinds of tools are available. Internal and external link tools are probably going to be very different, so there may not be a reason for having even a new common super category, while citations do contain external links, so the tools may overlap, so they may be either in one category, or two but linked in the description of each (e.g. "See also Category:Wikipedia external link tools"), but I'm not sure there are enough tools dealing just with external links and not citation to justify a category. The cat can just be called Citation tools and also include a few tools for external links which can also stay in the common cat Wiki tools. I hope this helps, but you decide. :) --V111P (talk) 05:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Life novels[edit]

If you are interested I think there are a couple more, one by Piers Anthony and one by Greg Bear. Would need a little research as I can't remember the titles (and, of course, might be wrong). All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC).

Civil Rights Movement[edit]

I have placed a Template:Cn on the Civil Rights Movement (disambiguation) page. I could not find a scholarly source that states,

"Civil Rights Movement refers to a movement seeking to improve civil and political rights, in particular by (a) making it illegal to, and/or (b) making it legal not to, discriminate against a group of people on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or the like."

Please provide the scholarly source you used for that definition. Thanks. Mitchumch (talk) 05:42, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

@Mitchumch: I was just trying to summarize, but I guess you have a point that it ought to be sourced somewhere; the other facts on the page are supposed to be sourced in their corresponding articles, but clearly there isn't one for this definition. I think it would probably be okay to keep the part before the comma, though; it isn't exactly synthesis or OR to connect the term Civil Rights Movement with civil and political rights, is it? (Maybe we could paraphrase something from civil rights movements?)
Anyway, that page is obviously far from perfect; I just thought it would be a good idea to have a page with links to different [elements of] civil rights movements, with less prose to skim than civil rights movements. —SamB (talk) 16:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
I think it would probably be okay to keep the part before the comma, though;
The Civil Rights Movement term on wikipedia, from my experience, suffers from too many editors not consulting sources to define it. The Civil Rights Movement is not an obscure topic - there are literally thousands of books and articles written about it. Consequently, if you are unable to support any statement with a citation from a reliable secondary source, then it's not a good idea to write it.
it isn't exactly synthesis or OR to connect the term Civil Rights Movement with civil and political rights, is it?
Please refer to the scholarly sources to answer this question.
Maybe we could paraphrase something from civil rights movements?
I participated in a lengthy discussion about the title of the article Civil rights movements. I also placed a Template:Cn in the first sentence of the lead paragraph that defined the term. No citation was ever given. That article is potentially OR. See Remove Movements for civil rights for a separate discussion surrounding original research concerns. Consequently, I would refrain from using that article for guidance.
I am concerned that the tone of my remarks are questionable. So, please do not take offense to my remarks. I am very interested in improving the quality of articles about the Civil Rights Movement on wikipedia. However, I have constantly found myself trying to undo unsourced claims. I am hoping this disambiguation page does not become another source of unsourced claims. Thanks for responding to my concerns. Mitchumch (talk) 11:14, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Courtesy notification[edit]

Since you reverted my redirection at PNGOUT, this is a courtesy message to alert you that I've nominated the page for deletion. The discussion is here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:38, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Portable Network Graphics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IDAT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Draft:First post (internet meme) concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:First post (internet meme), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:First post (internet meme)[edit]

Hello, SamB. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "First post".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2015 (UTC)