User talk:Skomorokh/क

Welcome back.[edit]

Hey, nice to see you again. 20:39, September 14, 2008 Zazaban

Thanks, hopefully I'll be able to get back to contributing significantly soon. Mahalo, Skomorokh 18:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restorations[edit]

{{Admin!}} I would like to have all revisions of the following articles (deleted on notability grounds) restored, then redirected to parent articles so that relevant content from the now deleted articles can be used in other articles without violating GFDL.

the defenestrator (or defenestrator) restored and redirected to A-Space.
Northeast Anarchist Network to Anarchism in the United States
Anarchist Communist Union of Seattle to Northwest Anarchist Federation
Co-ed Revolutionary Anarchist Liberation Union to Anarchism in Poland
Requiem (band) to CrimethInc.

I have no intention of recreating any of these redlinks as stand-alone articles (unless references supporting notability are forthcoming) and the content is not problematic on BLP/spam/POV/copyvio etc grounds, so I think restoring and redirection should not be a problem. the skomorokh 13:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Skomorokh, just saw your post on Xeno's talkpage, I'll work on these. I haven't looked at my dashboard in about two weeks, too busy. Sorry for the delay, these should start turning blue....Keeper ǀ 76 17:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much Keeper, I appreciate it. Needless to say, I don't hold you personally responsible for any delays! Mahalo, the skomorokh 17:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The right margin thing is trippin' me out, this is the first page I've seen set up that way :-) That said, they should be done. Do you want the defenestrator redirect recreated? You said "or" above, the "or" is only one edit that was set up as a redirect to "the defenestrator". Let me know! Keeper ǀ 76 17:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's supposed to function like one of those upside-down maps of the world, with Antartica at the top and Canada at the bottom...to disorient presuppositions. I'm not sure about defenestrator, can you check for me if it has any deleted content? Thanks, the skomorokh 17:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's restored (the one deleted edit was your edit moving the original title to "The Defenestrator". I've now moved it to A-Space. From the "southern hemisphere", cheers! (or should I say, "bottom's up!") Keeper ǀ 76 17:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your cultural sensitivity in noticing that this page uses British English. Ciao, the skomorokh 17:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anarchism templates[edit]

Thanks for your friendly message. I'm applying some standards I've picked up over the past year or so:

Templates that are the "core" template or templates for a category's topic are given the "[space]" or "[space]template-name" index (in this case {{Anarchism sidebar}} and Anarchism footer, if/when it's renamed Anarchism -- see below);

If the category is meant to carry navbox templates but there are one or two templates of another type (i.e. not enough to merit their own subcategory) then they're given the "[space]" index (with no trailing template-name);

μ = micro => stub (a "micro"-sized article, I guess);

τ = tau => template;

ω = omega, but looks like a "w", so indicates WikiProject/Task force/possibly Portal-related (I think);

There may be other Greek letters in use like the above, but if so, it's very infrequent and I can't recall any.

More recently, navbox / sidebar / other versions of the same or similar templates seem to be named "X" / "X sidebar" / "X other" (respectively) rather than "X footer" / "X" / various, so I renamed "Anarchism" to "Anarchism sidebar" and, once the transclusions have been updated, intended to request that "Anarchism footer" is renamed "Anarchism". (Do you think this is okay?)

Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating, I look forward to implementing this schema, thanks for the explanation. I don't think anyone would object strongly to naming the current {{Anarchism footer}} "Anarchism", once every existing transclusion is updated; I suggest you make a proposal at Template talk:Anarchism sidebar, a reasonably well-watched page, and I will notify the rest of the Anarchism taskforce. Sincerely, the skomorokh 16:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your positive response. I'm about to try completing the update and will then post a note at Template talk:Anarchism sidebar. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to it. Regards, the skomorokh 13:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers![edit]

I have been away, and am now back (sorta), and you were away, and are now back (sorta). So, good to see you! Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentiment is mutual, muchacho. Let me know when you need a posse to take on some oofensively bad articles. the skomorokh 12:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about now? I am looking, once again, at the Alternative society article, and trying to decide what to do, once and for all. It is weighing on my mind, I must admit. I've not looked at it, or worked on it, in quite some time, and I am eager for it to be sorted out. Was actually considering taking it to AfD, because I find nothing in it that can be merged, and do not think the idea of a disambiguation page is helpful simply because I do not see "alternative society" as a very likely search term. What do you say? Any thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shockwave[edit]

Hi. Re the (unreliable source) tag at William Gibson. Perhaps one (or more) of these would be preferable?

(Just found with a basic google, lots more in scholar/books: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

:) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bleargh...I have little appetite for adjudicating competing claims of who did what when, especially when they don't address each other or the subject of the article (i.e. Gibson) itself. I'll leave the tag up because the existing source is unsatisfactory, but by all means have a go at using one of the other ones if you think it beneficial. Thanks for the suggestion, and apologies for my jaded apathy, the skomorokh 12:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no problem. This place gets to me sometimes too.

I've replaced the cite with 1 and 3 from above, partially just to eliminate the last of the cleanup-needed tags. Ttfn. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infoshop[edit]

Hello Skomorokh. I am the one who edited the Infoshop page to give a more thorough description of the World Bank Infoshop in Washington DC. I disagree with your assertion that the content I posted violated the NPOV policy. Everything I put up there is also on the website for the WB Infoshop, and is easily verifiable. When I posted the new content I made it a point not to interfere with anything other than the section already dedicated to the WB Infoshop. This revised section does not take anything away from the article, and gives a more comprehensive overview of the WB operation,which I think would be of use to anyone researching the term "infoshop". I plan to repost the same content, and kindly ask that you leave it alone. Pushpin (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Pushpin, please accept my apologies for the overly accusatory welcome. You overrode perfectly good, relevant content (including replacing an image which depicted the subject of the article - anarchist social centres - with one that did not) without an explanation in your edit summaries; furthermore you marked your edits as minor, meaning an uncontroversial change (usually to grammar or coding or suchlike). This, along with the fact that all your edits were on the same topic made me suspicious of your actions. I can see now that you mean well.

The question of verifiability is separate from that of neutrality - as you say, the content you posted is on the World Bank website...which is exactly why its neutrality is suspect. We should expect organisations to portray themselves in a positive light rather than a neutral one. In any case, the real issue here is that the information you added does not tell the reader anything about the subject of the article - anarchist social centres. Wikipedia articles have one and only one subject; if multiple notable subjects exists with the same name, separate articles are maintained, linked to from a disambiguation page. For example, see Swerve (disambiguation); we should not expect to see a discussion of Swerve from the Transformers in the article about the LGBT magazine. If you think the WB infoshop is notable, by all means go ahead and create the World Bank Infoshop article, and we can link to it from the Infoshop article, but please do not persist in adding content irrelevant

to anarchist social centres to that article. Sincerely, the skomorokh 12:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow![edit]

My watchlist just got a whole lot prettier. Nice work -- Keeper ǀ 76 15:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Refs still need to be sorted, give me a minute. the skomorokh 15:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, finished the skeleton of a decent article. Seeing as no-one has !voted to delete at AfD, it is entirely up to you as nominator whether or not the discussion needs to continue. Regards, the skomorokh 16:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am an anarchist philosophical searching for ...[edit]

Please help me to read more on these topics and perhaps send me a newletter ar letter of some local minds loke mine, who seem to be searching for more enlightenment on this subject. My email address is Pennyds1@aol.com Will someoe please send me literaure and/or a list of local itineraries concrning my search for knowledge? I am a 38 yo person, am tired of the injustices our country seems to give a shit less about. Freedom is a thing of he past anymore.

Anarchist terminology[edit]

It looked ready, so I added it to the main space. Zazaban (talk) 06:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you... except, ah, you seem to have copypasted it instead of moving it, making it look like you are the sole author. Expect to hear from my lawyers! the skomorokh 09:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Err... Oops. That's what I get for editing at one in morning... :\ 14:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

De nada. Appreciate the WP:ATF-related tidying you've been doing lately, nice work. the skomorokh 16:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

manifold destiny[edit]

Hi, the sentence I added at the beginning of the article is not a "comment". It is a summary of the content of the article. Furthermore, it summarizes its content better than the paragraph following it, which gets into technical details without situating the page first. I am aware of the fact that wikipedia has a "three times" rule, but personally I find repeated reversals uncivil. I have clearly expressed disagreement with your edit. The next step should have been to discuss it at the talk page of the article. Katzmik (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, the problem with the sentence is its tone. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and should not address the reader (i.e. by including things like "it should be noted that"). A key part of this is to avoid self-references. Statements explaining to the reader what an article is about, such as "This page deals with X" do not belong, unless they aim to disambiguate (as in the intro to the New York article). For more information, check out WP:LEAD, the guide to writing lead sections.

Thanks for not reverting me; I reversed your change because I thought I had an uncontroversial reason for my edit that you didn't understand from the first time round, and I added an expanded explanation in my second edit summary. If you're not happy with what I am doing, I suggest you ask at the help desk or put {{helpme}} followed by your complaint on your own talkpage. Best of luck, and thanks for the consideration in contacting me, the skomorokh 16:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence did not include anything like "it should be noted that". If you are referring to the clause "this page deals with", it can be easily removed while retaining the information the sentence aimed to convey. Please comment further at the talk page. Katzmik (talk) 16:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hombre, don't take this personally, but I have no bone to pick with you and this is a waste of my time. The tone was the problem; you seem like an intelligent individual, so I'm sure you can find a way to alter the introduction to the article so that it better summarizes the article, without addressing the reader. Sincerely, the skomorokh 16:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Anarcho-capitalism[edit]

Hi again, Skomorokh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AAnarcho-capitalism&diff=240287486&oldid=240286466

Fair enough; as you probably guessed, I did simply invent the description in order to provide a groupname to complement "Features". Perhaps, then, "Features" may as well be removed too -- it otherwise seems to draw too much attention..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 02:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, Sardanaphalus, I'm going to copy this to the template talkpage and follow this up there, cool? the skomorokh 13:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds a good idea. Incidentally, what do you make of this, a version of the "Anarchism sidebar" template which uses {{collapsible list}}s? Using {{Anarchism sidebar |expanded=all}} would then produce the current "Anarchism sidebar expanded" template, i.e. render it unnecessary as a separate template. With a bit more work, it should also be possible to specify which section to show expanded, depending on the article where the template appears. The other political ideology templates might benefit from this approach too. Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From a reader's point of view, your sandbox version seems to work identically with the existing version. The ability to do without a separate expanded template seems a bonus without a price, so I'd say go ahead. The expanded sections would be a very welcome addition. What I would really like to be able to do is make it easier for inexperienced users to add entries without having to add the <br /> and {{·}} code all the time; if we could have some |entry1=[[Article 1]] |entry2=[[Article 2]] etc. system with automatic line breaks, that would be ideal, but I haven't been able to figure out the code yet. You might want to talk to Cast (talk · contribs), who has done some work on these templates and might have some valuable thoughts or feedback. Keep up the good work! the skomorokh 14:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support. I updated "Anarchism sidebar" and included the possibility of specifying one of the lists as expanded; to give some idea other than the explanation on the template page, I've just implemented this option on one page from each list (mostly one of if not the first in each list).

I imagine providing some system that doesn't require inexperienced users to add or copy-paste <br/>s or {{·}}s is a kind of template "holy grail", as the only alternative I can think of at present is something like the "|entry1=... |entry2=..." you mention -- i.e. a separate parameter for each item -- which in its own way is cumbersome and could become quite complex quite quickly ("|group1_item1=... |group1_item2=... ...|groupX_itemY...", then subgroups...) Maybe it's possible to create a template that takes a list of items separated by commas and convert the commas into {{·}}s, but I don't think I've seen anything like that yet. I've left a note on Cast's talkpage pointing him/her here. Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Objectivism article moves[edit]

Hi, I've "hijacked" your initiative to rename the criticism article for the main article. If the main article is renamed then it would make sense to subsequently follow suit on the criticism article. Despite my opposition to renaming the criticism article as proposed, I support the idea of improving the titles. Karbinski (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I commend your initiative in hijacking my initiative :) the skomorokh 17:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This may sound ridiculous, but...[edit]

{{helpme}} I'm trying to write the article on Disneyland with the Death Penalty, but the internet cafe from which I am editing does not allow me to search Google. Could a charitable soul please search Google News for the exact phrase "disneyland with the death penalty", click the all dates option, and copy the url's of the articles here? I'd really appreciate it. Thanks, the skomorokh 22:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

here ya go. Let me know if that isn't what you wanted :-) Keeper ǀ 76 22:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even better. I think I shall make you my official pet admin. Mahalo, the skomorokh 22:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, I spoke too soon. Could you put the search terms in quotes? I only need articles that have the exact phrase. Gracias, the skomorokh

Of course you do, my bad :-). Take two. Do I get a biscuit now??? Keeper ǀ 76 22:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I switched internet cafe's and no longer need your services. A cruel mistress, I know, yet... the skomorokh 22:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My mouth waters looking forward to the next time you ring my bell.... :-) Keeper ǀ 76 22:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the rate you lot are scarfing up new powers over us worthless peons, it won't be long I imagine ;) the skomorokh 23:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Disneyland with the Death Penalty[edit]

On 28 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Disneyland with the Death Penalty, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Speaking which, Singapore GP is now on! Anyway thank you for your contributions! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 11:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How fortuitous! I do hope I haven't caused them any bad P.R. Thank you for doing the dogsbody work. Regards, the skomorokh 12:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) I'm used to this kind of task. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 13:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another restoration/redirect[edit]

{{admin!}} Can you restore all (non-vandalistic) revisions of Geekipedia and redirect the article to Wired (magazine)? Geekipedia may become notable in its own right in which case it would be best not to re-invent the wheel; failing notability, some relevant content might be used in the Wired article, for which the redirect would be a GFDL requirement. Gracias, the skomorokh 18:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only content of Geekipedia is "Geekipedia is a supplement to Wired (magazine)." with an external link. There's nothing there that is not already in the Wired (magazine) article so there is, I think, little point in restoring the content. You can of course make a redirect if you wish. Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thanks for your rapid response Malcolm. Regards, the skomorokh 18:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnerkrigg Court suggestions[edit]

Thanks for your very helpful and insightful suggestions about how to improve this article. I will get to work soon on trying to rectify as many of these issues as I can. Best, —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 19:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure; please ask if there's anything else I can help with. Sincerely, the skomorokh 20:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez...[edit]

Created any new articles lately...? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 01:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's behavioural conditioning: "Bad Skomorokh, you have just spent x hours watching inane youtube videos - as penance you must write x new Wikipedia articles". Quit stalking my contribs man! the skomorokh 13:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon, by now, surely you have realized that I haven't anything better to do! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For someone with such a stimulating job description, you do seem awfully bored...the skomorokh 16:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have been getting a lot of work done on my script, believe it or not. Roughly 1/3 of the articles on my watchlist have some connection to what I am writing, so editing here is almost always useful to the project. One of these years, it will be on stage, and then someone can write an article about it! ;) Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh...that is a fantastic excuse...damn. Send me the newspaper clippings when the curtain raises, I'll write the article as recompense for my snide insinuations! the skomorokh 13:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha ha!! Done and done! You should go ahead and keep yourself busy in meatime... this might take a while... ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cquote[edit]

In response to your question: Yes, personally I much prefer the {{cquote}} to none at all, mainly for consistancy and looks. The template you have set up at Portal:Anarchism/Selected quote should give you the same results each time, unfortunatly this doesn't always happen, Portal:Anarchism/Selected quote/12 uses quote marks, which is why I use cquote. Joe I 07:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, very good. I've gone ahead and implemented it, thank you so much for repsonding to my enquiry. Mahalo, the skomorokh 13:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]