User talk:SWAdair

Please click here to leave me a new message.

This page will be archived every 50 discussion topics or fewer, depending on the length of the discussions.

Archives
APR 04 - SEP 04 SEP 04 - DEC 04 DEC 04 - MAR 05 MAR 05 - JUN 05 JUN 05 - NOV 06 NOV 06 - ?

---

[edit] November Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: Admin Coaching (needs coaches!) Admin Coaching needs coaches!!! If you are an administrator, or even a generally experienced user, do consider signing up to be a coach. Admin Coaching, now being coordinated by HighwayCello, is a program for people who want help learning some of the more subtle aspects of Wikipedia policy and culture. People are matched with experienced users who are willing to offer coaching. The program is designed for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. What's New? The Tutorial Drive is a new Esperanza program! In an effort to make complicated processes on Wikipedia easier for everyone, Esperanza working to create and compile a list of tutorials about processes here on Wikipedia. Consider writing one! A discussion on how Esperanza relates to the encyclopedia has been started; please add your thoughts. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) The list of proposed programs has been updated, with some proposals being archived. There is now a new program: the Tutorial Drive! Consider writing a tutorial on something you are good at doing on Wikipedia. The suggestion of adding a cohesive look to all the Esperanza pages is being considered; join the discussion if you are interested! In order to make a useful interlanguage welcome template, those involved in translation projects will be asked what English Wikipedia policies are most important and confusing to editors coming from other language Wikipedias. A discussion of Esperanza's role in Wikipedia is being held, with all thoughts of all Esperanzians wanted! Shreshth91 informed everyone that he will be leaving the Esperanza council as life is rather busy; his spot will be filled by the runner up from the last election, HighwayCello. Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

[edit] Thanks

Thanks, man. Sometimes I miss those tools, but then I remember how addicted I was then, how I almost felt I had a responsibility to be online. LOL. I'm glad to see you're still around and kicking. Take care. SWAdair 01:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a tough addiction. I just come here when I have deadlines coming up real close, it's a wonderful to avoid doing work. Glad to see you've found a way to handle it too. --fvw* 01:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] linkspammer

67.121.240.231 aka 67.123.6.139 aka 75.7.17.96 is the owner of a geocities website which sells CDs and links to his ebay page. He continues to spam the Thalia and Paulina Rubio pages (mixing in other links to disguise his own spam linking). In addition to his eventual blocking, please get an admin to issue an sprotect of the Paulina Rubio and Thalia pages as he frequently changes IP addresses, thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.0.101.151 (talk • contribs).

I've already reported him at WP:AIV. Shouldn't be long. I'll include the request for sprotect on his talk page so the blocking admin will see it. Thank you for your help reverting the linkspam. SWAdair 09:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I come on wikipedia just to contribute or to remove spam links, pathetically he's trying to re-vandalize pages I've fixed just because I remove his moneymaking spam links. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.0.101.151 (talk • contribs).

You're welcome. He's been blocked and the last of it reverted. I'm glad you use good edit summaries -- that was what caught my eye. I might not have looked closely enough to see what he was doing, but it was obvious once my attention was focused by your edit summaries. Thank you. SWAdair 09:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your notice to Embarkedaxis

Hi, you left this note on Embarkedaxis' talk page. Please be aware that that there exists no consensus on whether the Image:Maome.jpg which Embarkadaxis removed should be present in the Muhammad page. The image has been the subject of extensive discussion and currently the subject of a mediation effort involving many editors. For these reasons, I see his action as a content dispute, rather than as vandalism. Please note that I myself have reverted edits by Embarkedaxis, and support his previous block for 3RR. However, I do not believe his recent removal of Image:Maome.jpg from the Muhammad article to be vandalism. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 12:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm glad to see others are involved. From the many messages left on his talk page, and the nature of the edits that caused those messages to be left, I see his persistent removal of images without consensus as going beyond content dispute. I hope the mediation goes well. SWAdair 05:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dan neiwert

There had been numerous vandelism on the Dan Neiwert page. Can you please either lock the page, delete it, or report the people who are the ones vandelizing the page.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.82.178.184 (talk • contribs).

It appears that article has already been deleted per Afd consensus. SWAdair 05:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userpage vandalism

(So as I started to say....) No problem at all; I'm glad I noticed it. I have no idea what people like that think they're accomplishing. Vandalize Wikipedia, get blocked. Woo-hoo! -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 07:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep an eye on my page...I'm sure I'll need a return favour sometime. I haven't kept a vandalism counter, but I'm somewhere around 40 or 50. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 08:04, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I love the block comments from Mike Rosoft! Anyway...I caught the vandalism on your page because it was on my watch-list; I set the flag to watchlist any page I edit (which I'm not sure is a good idea; I'm up to 2500 pages). -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 08:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for that response

I've followed up on the user's new static IP at User talk:219.78.221.58. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 15:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Holy Name University

Thanks for the speedy action on my request for help. I've started to work on the article. I still have a lot more to do. But you've made the start possible! Maybe you can tell me how I've done so far, too. Guest818 04:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, it looks great, but there is a problem. The article is a copyright infringement of the text at the university's website. The university's website even has "Copyright © 2006. All rights reserved" at the bottom of each page. Copyrighted text cannot be used in Wikipedia articles. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for a full explanation. All submissions must be compatible with the GFDL. If you are a high-level administrator at the university and have the legal right to release the text under the GFDL, take a look at the section Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Wikipedia: at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you don't have the legal right to release the text under the GFDL, I'm afraid the article will need to be rewritten in your own words. You can still follow the basic outline that you have, but everything needs to be phrased in your own words instead of using text that someone else has already copyrighted. SWAdair 04:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again for the heads up. I will see what I can do on re the copyright. Guest818 05:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Happy birthday

Big thanks for the birthday wishes! Your kindness is greatly appreciated! --Merovingian ※ Talk 22:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] might have new editor

That's good news! Guest818 00:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Just wondering, and curious on 2 things: how is the new editor? and what did he say about Holy Name University? Guest818 09:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

He really liked the Holy Name University article, and related Philippine articles, but I think the major hurdle to getting him active is confidence in his English. His English is good enough, but he seems hesitant. I decided not to push too hard, just keep showing him articles every once in a while and let him decide when the time is right. You've done quite a job with that article. Wow! I just checked your contributions. You've been busy.  :) Quite a lot of new material added to several articles. You're a wealth of historical information. I'm glad to see you've jumped right in. Take care, and happy editing! SWAdair 04:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious to know what your friend knows about Holy Name University, as you said, he started to talk about it without looking at the article...--Guest818 10:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colin James (journalist)

Context note: An anon asked, on the reference desk, how he could get an article about himself removed. My response is here.SWAdair 10:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Two things:

1. The text of the article was in fact copied verbatim from the official webpage. I've deleted most of it, and informed the original author, and I guess somebody will have to put it back together.
2. You might want to be careful about posting your email address on the reference desk—the spambots will find it!

Also, I doubt the user complaining on the ref desk was the real Colin James, for the simple reason that the article probably wasn't inaccurate, but of course it's best to give the user options as though he is (so you did the right thing in that regard). -- SCZenz 09:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, copyvio. I'm glad you caught that. I don't worry so much about spambots; I've got gmail -- great filters. I've helped in a couple of similar biography situations before, by doing exactly what I offered here. Interestingly enough, I never got an e-mail from that person. And yes, I always try to give the benefit of the doubt, especially in the often-touchy area of biographies of living persons. Thank you for following up on that. SWAdair 09:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RJC

Hi SWAdair,

I saw your note on my talk page.

As you may be aware from the discussion page of RJC, I do not delete others contribution. However, this must be in a reciprocal manner. Therefore you may also want to tell others not to delete my contributions.

Thanks.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Icecold1 (talk • contribs).

I saw the edit war and associated talk page, but you were deleting large sections of valid text. Please see WP:POINT. It appears multiple editors were reverting not only your blanking but also the text you added to the article, asking you to discuss it on the talk page instead. If you would like input from other editors, the proper course of action is not to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, but to list the article at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. SWAdair 07:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks for your message. I mentioned that I am fine with discussion so long that my version stays until a consensus is achieved. Since the other editors do not have a better idea, than my should be the dest idea for the time being. I guess they cannot just take the easy way out and delete my contribution.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Icecold1 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Speedy deletion of Image talk:Dumdums.jpg

I noticed you removed my speedy deletion tag of Image talk:Dumdums.jpg, stating that it shows up if you use alternative means of getting to the picture. This is because the image is hosted on commons. The speedy deletion criteria still apply, as it is a talk page of a page that only exists on commons, not wikipedia. People should post comments on the commons talk page, not create a wikipedia one for it. I have retagged it for speedy deletion. VegaDark 19:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it. Thank you. SWAdair 04:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] aje

Context note: This is in reference to this message. SWAdair 09:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I will check to fix this. However the link is broken, it wont change it even if you block me.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.58.130.206 (talk • contribs).

Please do check. Since several others are seeing the slashes, it is likely that there is a problem with your browser. The browser issue could also explain why you see the link as broken but Kf4bdy says he has tested it and the link is fine. And, umm... the "even if you block me" comment isn't actually necessary. I understand that you mean to say "it's broken and blocking me won't change that fact" but the way it came across sounds like a bit of a challenge. I know you most likely didn't mean it that way, but it isn't helpful in trying to fix the problem. Please remember that most everyone here is more than happy to help with any issue. That's why we're here. We want to help. Please keep that in mind when discussing things. Thank you. SWAdair 09:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] rangel

i have met alot of people who consider him a jerk, how is that nonsense? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.236.198.210 (talk • contribs).

Your first edit and your second. Those types of edits do not appear as if you are here to contribute to Wikipedia in a constructive manner. Please see Wikipedia:Vandalism. SWAdair 07:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re Divine World College of Legaspi and Divine World College of Legazpi

Policy allows for speedy deletion of "Any page for which deletion is requested by the original author, provided the page's only substantial content was added by its author and was mistakenly created." All you have to do is tag the page with {{db-author}} and it will be deleted as a matter of housekeeping. SWAdair 05:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Done!Thanks for the advice. Best regards!--Guest818 10:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Award

I award you this Philippine barnstar for all your valuable help with my start up articles, and maybe many more... --Guest818 10:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC).

Wow, thank you. I'm glad to have been able to provide what little assistance I have, and of course I'll be happy to help any time. Thank you for your recognition. It is much appreciated. SWAdair 00:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. And thank you!--Guest818 01:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi again! I was fixing my userbox today, and only noticed your fixing it. Thank you! Indeed, the barnstar is well-deserved by you, with all the extra attention on my "neopedia" activities, including the nitty gritty! I've been getting side-tracked with little articles/ stubs, I haven't done really much with the early ones I was working on, like HNU and the other SVD Schools. But it will be good to get your expert and honest opinion on the ones I've worked on or contributed, especially the: Philippine Tarsier Foundation, Philippine Tarsier, Chocolate Hills. Best regards! --Guest818 10:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for your edits on the Philippine Tarsier Foundation. I am not too keen on the "standards" yet. It's good to have somebody double check. Unlike the other articles, there are only few editors on this article. If there are still other things you think I can improve, especially on the content, that will be good too. Best regards.--Guest818 05:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for responding so promptly to my {{helpme}} request. --Joe Schme^(ssages)dley 16:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Open proxies

Hi! I noticed this comment. The replacement of every apostrophe (') in an article with (\') is the typical fingerprint of an open proxy. When you see that, the IP should be reported to WP:OP; if it's confirmed to be an open proxy, it's indefinitely blocked. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 04:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that's very interesting. I didn't know that was typical of open proxies. Very good to know. Thank you. SWAdair 04:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chocolate Hills

Hi! My appreciation for your expertise. I am overhauling the article. --Guest818 02:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cabragh House

I've excerpted this from the Discussion page of Cabragh House since I was afraid you might have missed it. Apologies in advance if this is superfluous or impertinent:

W. Frank 02:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It is shaping up well. I added "is a New Zealand Historic Place" in the introductory sentence. Wikipedia articles can quickly get deleted if they don't assert importance, and it is best to do so from the very beginning. As for the photos, they can be added if they comply with the Image use policy. SWAdair 11:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the encouragement. Obviously I don't want all my hard work to be in vain and have this article deleted before I've had the chance to add the photographs and architectural commentary.
However I have two difficulties:
1) I'm pretty sure that the registration is still pending and it is Amber House (next door at 46 Weka Street) that is proposed for registration and not number 48 - although local people are suggesting that, given their joint histories and complimentary styles, both should be registered.
2) It is really the building that housed the Cabragh House School (currently known as Amber House) that is historic in the New Zealand context (although both are important in an architectural sense as a perfect adjacent matched pair of the New Zealand vernacular style).
The main claim to fame is the interior of Cabragh House and I am still educating myself on the etiquette of posting a whole raft of interior shots.

I therefore propose changing your phrase "Cabragh House (school and residence) is a registered New Zealand Historic Place."

to

"Cabragh House (school and residence) is considered an historic site for exemplarising late Victorian furnishings and provincial New Zealand vernacular architecture. The former site of Cabragh House School, now known as Amber House, is pending registration as a New Zealand Historic Place "

but waiting until 14 December 2006 to make this change in my article pending further research and/or comments on this discussion page.

Thank you once again for your help! W. Frank 14:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll let you handle the wording of the introduction, when and as needed, as you are much more aware of the particulars. As for your earlier question concerning images, the simplified answer is that you can upload the pictures if you own them and are willing to release them under the GFDL or if the owner of the photos gives permission to release them under the GFDL. You'll find all the particulars at Wikipedia:Image use policy. SWAdair 04:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments on my talk page

Context note: This is in response to this comment on User talk:Carmela Soprano. SWAdair 08:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I disagree with a number of statements you made. I read the policy pages in question. You said, "He didn't "bite" the newcomer." I disagree. He took an action and didn't explain why, as instructed on the Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers page. You also state, "there was very little he could have done differently." Again, I disagree. If you read Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, you'll see he violated the policy. Rhobite is shoving policy down my throat, but then when the shoe is on the other foot, he ignores policy. I'm sorry, when someone clearly is targeting me, it's no longer possible to "assume good faith." He clearly wanted to "best" me and violated policy in the process. It was more important that he "win," and to do so, he clearly and explicitly violated Wikipedia policy. I'm not looking for excuses or patronizing here. I was treated shabily, and policy was violated by Rhobite. A remedy is thus in order. Carmela Soprano 07:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:FU violation

Your change to Michelle Trachtenberg was in violation of WP:FU and has been reverted. We may not use fair-use images to depict living people. --Yamla 17:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that. I had seen the photo used to depict the character she plays (Dawn Summers) and added it to Michelle Trachtenberg, without checking to see if it was licensed as Fair Use. SWAdair 04:09, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nationalist People's Coalition

That was fast! Thanks so much! For awhile there, I got frustrated, plus my wireless laptop played a trick on me! Anyway, your quick "to the rescue" is much appreciated. I wonder what to do with the template now???--Pinay06 08:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've tried checking other articles using this template (there are quite a few) but every one of them has the same issue -- the template is full-screen and bumps the body of the article. I'm checking to see if I can change the coding of the template to prevent this. This is something I'm not accustomed to dealing with so right now it is trial and error. If I can get it to work properly, I'll go ahead and edit the articles using the template so everything shows properly. SWAdair 08:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Okey. I thought the problem had to do with my wireless/internet connection, etc. Well, thanks again and happy editing. Have a nice weekend! --Pinay06 08:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I will alert the Philippine Notice Board on the issue at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines.--Pinay06 09:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Aligning a template

Oh, whoops -- didn't see your message til now. I'll find some time to look at it, tomorrow, when I'll hopefully be significantly more awake. ;) If you find somebody else, by then, no problem. Appreciate the thought. Good luck! Luna Santin 09:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute at User talk:76.170.239.56

Hi. Something else that needs to be taken into account is the apparent fact that User:76.170.239.56 appears to be a sockpuppet of User:Dnyhagen. At least it appears there are people involved in this conflict that are accusing the anon of being him (compare the discussions underway at Talk:Old-time radio). If that's the case, this might be a situation where the problem can be solved in another manner beyond the No Personal Attacks rule (incidentally he also called me an illiterate earlier on the anon's talk page). If I hadn't become involved in the argument I probably would have blocked him by now on account of his editing "from the shadows". Any thoughts? 23skidoo

Sockpuppetry is not germaine to this discussion. The fact that 23Skiddoo is a repeated link spammer stands on it's own. Violations of Wikipedia Guidelines are plain and simple. The fact that 23Skiddoo would intentionally mischaracterize any of my deletions as un-commented was just a flat lie, and he or she knows it. Lying about either the motives or facts of any edit--or editor--is an unscrupulous practice, by any definition. "Editing from the shadows" is an aburd allegation. Someone explain to me how it can be that on a discussion page with every personal detail revealed about an otherwise 'anonymous' contributor can even remotely be deemed 'from the shadows'. It's absurd on the face of it. 23Skiddoo obviously bristled at the notion of abusive link spamming being deleted from some of the sites he or she contributes to. That's his or her personal issue, period. My 'anonymity' is laughable, given the repeated personal attacks my deletions of spam links has generated. If absence of anonymity is at issue, perhaps 23Skiddoo would care to provide all of his or her personal details on the attack page at issue. The 'Dispute' at issue, is repeated commercial or self-promoting link spamming. Period. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.170.239.56 (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Hmm... I checked the history of User:Dnyhagen and saw no official action taken against him (e.g. ban, RfC, etc.) so I wouldn't really consider his editing while logged out as sockpuppetry. I think the best course of action right now is strict enforcement of WP:NPA. If they (and by "they" I mean both parties concerned) can conduct themselves according to Wikipedia policy, then they should be allowed to continue to edit. If they can't, then enforcement of WP:NPA will take care of the problem. It seems obvious to me that neither side will agree with the other and further discussions directly between the involved parties is pointless and counter-productive. I would like to see them enter into mediation or allow the issue to be decided by the Wikipedia community at large by means of an RfC. If they keep making personal attacks, however, it won't reach that point. One or both of them will end up blocked or banned. SWAdair 07:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Help me understand what you expect me to agree to. Please. I genuinely, truly wish to know. Am I to agree to suspension of the Wikipedia prohibitions against link farming and spamming for four sites on Wikipedia while the rest of us enforce these prohibitions against all others? Help me understand how it can be helpful to suspend enforcing the abuses of, for example, libsyn.com, which for at least six months has been using Wikipedia to the tune of over 270 external links to promote their commercial interests on the back of Wikipedia. I truly want to understand what precisely you expect me to agree to. Please. 76.170.239.56 08:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.170.239.56 (talk) 08:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Having seen yet another editor chime in on the dispute over spamming links, and yet again completely overlook libsyn.com, I can't help but wonder at the motivations here. 270 gratuitous commercial links, 'somehow overlooked' for over 6 months that I'm aware of anyway. How is that possible? Or rather how is that possible unless there's some sort of agreement or 'understanding' between any number of editors of Wikipedia to simply overlook the most egregious violations of link spamming? Is there some obscure commercial connection between libsyn.com and Wikipedia? Are they a large donation source in support of Wikipedia? If that's all it is, someone please simply tell me, and I'll protect them just as all other editors here seem to be doing. I won't have any respect for the integrity of Wikipedia as a result, but at the least, I can avoid creating such a fuss again in the future. I'll tell you what would be a bit more helpful though. Simply add libsyn.com as one of any number of apparent exceptions to Wikipedia's External Linking guidelines, instead of creating so much confusion about who the guidelines apply to, and who they don't apply to. Just trying to be helpful.76.170.239.56 12:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.170.239.56 (talk) 12:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

LOL, umm... I don't know quite how to respond to that, except to chuckle. No, There is no such 'understanding' that I am aware of. You asked what it is that I expect you to agree to. Very simply, and this is the only topic I have touched on in my discussions with you, I expect you to agree to not make personal attacks. Yes, I have noticed a distinct reduction of 'in-kind' responses from you. Thank you. Please notice that I haven't stated or even suggested anything regarding the spam-or-not-spam nature of the OTR links. All I have concentrated on is ensuring that discourse here at Wikipedia does not devolve into flame wars -- something that drives good editors away. All I ask is that you conduct your affairs here in a civil manner, even if you are attacked. That last part is important. WP:NPA does not prohibit personal attacks "unless you are attacked first." It prohibits personal attacks, period. If someone violates that policy, then by all means report them, but do not respond in-kind. I thank you for reducing the in-kind responses, and I urge you to eliminate them entirely. That is all I ask of you. Thank you. SWAdair 15:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Politics of Philippines

Hi! Just letting you know its been Fixed! by bluemask Thank you for the support!--Pinay06 19:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism to my page

Hello! Thanks for reverting that attack on my page. I woke up this morning to an e-mail from Will showing the IP's contribs... lovely wakeup on a Saturday! :-P — Editor at Large^(speak) 19:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dekada '70

Hi! I need your help again. I was moving Dekada 70 to Dekada '70 last night because the latter is the correct title of both film and novel. Somehow, when I made a new edit, my browser took me to the old Dekada 70, etc. I wonder if you can intervene on the move for me. I am currently the only author of the article. Thanks. --Pinay06 ^{talk 23:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)}

What you'll need to do is tag the incorrectly titled article (Dekada 70) with {{db-author}} and then it will be deleted as a matter of housekeeping. SWAdair 06:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Done! Thank you. --Pinay06 07:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. 'Always glad to help. SWAdair 15:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Site Spamming

A while back you helped revert some link spamming of the Paulina Rubio and Thalia pages. The link spammer puts the link to his commercial album site http://www.geocities.com/cvc_online on about half a dozen pages on here regularly. Isn't there a way to request an admin sitewide ban of this link so that it can't be added to any page in the future since its noticeably a commercial spam link?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.155.70.148 (talk • contribs).

It is possible to block a user from editing, but there is no way that I know of to scan edits prior to saving to see if they contain certain links. This particular person can't easily be blocked because he uses a range of IP addresses, meaning that blocking the entire range would likely block other people using the same service provider. Unfortunately, this looks like one of those cases where target articles have to be placed on a watchlist. Hmm... I just realized... you don't have the ability to create a watchlist unless you create an account. You may want to consider registering. No personal information is required (you can still remain anonymous) and there are several benefits. SWAdair 04:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I think the blacklist you were thinking of is the one here. SWAdair 04:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your expertise is needed!

Hi! I wrote the article Eskaya, but in collaboration with others who have done actual research on this cultural minority, came up with a revision which is presently in Visayan-Eskaya. We are merging both, with the current Visayan-Eskaya as the current main content but retaining the title Eskaya. The other author User:Perezkelly wrote that in the Talk:Visayan-Eskaya. I also have emails to this effect. How to do it? Please help! Thanks so much!!!--Pinay06 05:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

If I understood that correctly, you want the article to eventually reside at Eskaya, but you want to use the text at Visayan-Eskaya as the basis for the article. In that case, the best way to avoid GFDL issues is to:

1) Replace the text currently at Eskaya with the text from Visayan-Eskaya. Add the template {{inuse}} to the top of Eskaya. When you do this, use the edit summary "Merge from Visayan-Eskaya."

2) Redirect Visayan-Eskaya to Eskaya.

3) Now return to Eskaya and work on it until you're finished. Each time you re-instate text from the previous version, use the edit summary "Re-instating text from earlier version."

4) When you're done, remove the {{inuse}} template.

This process is similar to the one explained at Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages. The reason I suggest doing it this way is that if you merge text from one article to another, you should use an edit summary indicating where the text originally came from, in order to satisfy GFDL requirements. If you merged from Eskaya to Visayan-Eskaya, and then merged the finished text back to Eskaya, you would have to be careful with the edit summaries to keep an accurate record of attribution. Even if you did, the attribution record would be needlessly complicated. It is easier to simply over-write the article at Eskaya and then merge what you want from the earlier version. Also note that when you merge articles, you cannot delete the one you merged from (that would destroy the record of edit history and violate GFDL). That means the one you merge from should become a redirect pointing to the article you merge to. I hope that was clear without being too complicated. If you still have questions, please feel free to ask. SWAdair 06:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okey. Thanks for the step-by-step explanation. Sounds complicated to me now (like the archiving I did today!) but your outline will guide me through. Your suggestion is very logical. There is still much information in Eskaya that will be retained. And yes, I was going to redirect Visayan-Eskaya to Eskaya. Having told you of the intention, do I have a timeline to do this? Or can the merge be done within the week. Once again, thank you for the expertise! --Pinay06 06:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

No timeline, but since Eskaya has been edited by quite a few people, some of whom may be interested in it, it would be best not to keep the article in a work state for any longer than necessary. If the merging would take several days, it might be best to do all of the merging offline in a word processor and only merge once you have it polished. That would prevent prolonged interruption of the main article. SWAdair 07:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okey. Thank you! --Pinay06 09:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

That was an accident. I pasted the AfD template from another page. Those pages that I put that on were all related. --69.47.156.93 09:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eskaya

- This is to thank you for the help with the Eskaya article. It is in place now, though there is still some more rooom for improvement. --Pinay06|talk|cont 02:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm glad to see everything went smoothly. Good job, BTW. SWAdair 02:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you cannot imagine how hard it was! I did not know editors with software, like spellchecker, couldn't see the inuse tag! At any rate, it's done. Just needing some more polishing. You can take a look and give your honest/open critique...--Pinay06|talk|cont 02:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can I just host my story here?

]? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jbigz (talk • contribs).

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a host provider. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we are happy to accept contributions of an encyclopedic nature. Considering the "creative writing" aspect of your contribution to Jonathan Bigelow, you may be interested in a creative writing forum. SWAdair 07:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)