User talk:Viriditas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia policies
Article standards
Neutral point of view Verifiable information only No original research Citing sources What Wikipedia is not Biographies of living persons
Working with others
Civility and etiquette No personal attacks Resolving disputes

Contents 1 Archives 2 Category 3 Sock puppet allegation 4 Straight-shooter 5 Welcome to Novels WikiProject 6 Jews for Jesus 7 Mission District references 8 The Fountain 9 Prestige's importance 10 Welcome to the Films WikiProject! 11 Thank you 12 WP:FILMS Newsletter 13 comments pages for Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii rankings 14 Peter Tamony 15 Advice about an obsessive updater 16 Hawaii geo stubs 17 George Ewart 18 Talk page discussion 19 Your input is requested 20 Creating user sub-pages 21 The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006 22 The Fountain for Review 23 WatchlistBot 24 PocKleanBot 25 Canvassing 26 small option of template

[edit] Archives

/Archives

[edit] Category

Thank you for the notice, otherwise I probably wouldn't of caught that. You're right, most weren't recipies anyway. That's right, I misspelt recipe again. ReverendG 17:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Come to think of it, you deserve one of these

. ReverendG 17:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sock puppet allegation

Hi Viriditas, I thought that you should know that you have been named as a suspected sockpuppet at: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Chondrite. Chondrite 08:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Simonapro finally lost it. I see he's been blocked indefintely as well. —Viriditas | Talk 10:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Straight-shooter

I figured I'd clean up Dugout (smoking) and add Straight-shooter as an alternate term. This page adds nothing and shall be prodded. ReverendG 04:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Novels WikiProject

Don't forget the Userbox. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jews for Jesus

Hi and welcome to a good contender for most disputed page in Wikipedia. I'd really ask that you joing the discussion on the talk page rather than just reverting the article. The issue is being strongly debated; extra reverts don't help much.

With regards to your edit summary "..misrepresent the Jewish POV", I would hope I don't have to point out that Wikipedia is not supposed to be supporting the Jewish POV. We are supposed to be presenting the Neutral POV. Do have a look at the section where this is discussed. DJ Clayworth 15:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Writing for the enemey involves representing a POV. The edit you are defending deceptively presented a non-neutral POV as neutral by inferring that some Jews could be Jews for Jesus. Please don't bother replying here if you are going to keep playing these silly semantic games. —Viriditas | Talk 19:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mission District references

You said the references I removed were "perfectly acceptable in this context, and serve to support the content". They're not. Did you actually look at them? I waded through pages and pages of bureaucratese and found nothing even remotely related to the statements they were supposedly referencing. It's not enough for references to be technically supportive: readers who open links like these should have some reasonable expectation of actually finding the reference in a short amount of time. That's why I removed them. +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You've made an error. Please review the citations again. They support the content they were referencing entirely, and they are perfectly acceptable in this context. —Viriditas | Talk 20:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Fountain

Dude! I don't think you get it. The paragraph has a run-on sentence, and the last sentence is unclear about who actually climbs the steps -- the conquistador or the priest. Fine, I'll renege on the temple/pyramid deal, but the other stuff, you can't just revert in whole. Change what needs to be changed, because if you're gonna keep a run-on over a valid sentence, you have a problem. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 04:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

"His men are killed in battle and Tomás is captured by a crowd of Mayan warriors who spare his life, but force him to climb the pyramid." That is a run-on, son. If you're going to revert my edits, I'm going to point out each valid edit you revert on your talk page. Here's another: "Upon reaching the temple at the top, a Mayan priest stabs Tomás in the stomach." Is the Mayan priest or Tomas reaching the top? That needs to be clarified. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 04:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Can I suggest adding a more accurate tag to the Themes and influences section, or at least write something on the talk page about why you think it needs improvement? The clean-up template you added to the section requests either course of action to communicate with other editors what could be improved. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 16:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd still like you to add a more accurate tag or write something on the talk page for the Themes section. Otherwise, I'm just going to remove it, since you've obviously gotten this message and are preferring to edit on your own. In addition, I had the Themes and influences in one section because of sentences like this one: "Although ancient Mayan mysticism is a primary cultural influence in the film,[18] Jackman describes the story as a modern myth that helps humans understand the meaning of life. According to Jackson, these myths help explain the unexplainable, to reach a state of understanding: "These fables may not make scientific sense, but somehow they explain the world to us," which has influence and theme; and this sentence: "Director Darren Aronofsky also explores the modern theme of the Fountain of Youth; Aronofsky was inspired by an article in the New York Times that characterized aging as a disease that could be cured. In the film, Aronofsky considers the repercussions of actualizing life extension," which has theme and inspiration/influence. Where should they be located, then? I understand the reason why you broke them down, but I wanted to make clear that the actually defined themes from people who worked on the film were distinct from the reviewers' own interpreted themes. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 15:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prestige's importance

It's got a 74% rating on R.T. and 8.2 weighted average on IMDb, so I'm unsure of a Mid. It's not flopped like The Fountain mind. Wiki-newbie 19:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the Films WikiProject!

[edit] Thank you

A message of appreciation is always welcome.

I haven't kept up with the lead and Themes, so I don't know that they need more than a routine copy edit. Cognita 18:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:FILMS Newsletter

The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comments pages for Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii rankings

Hi Viriditas,

I have no objections to anything at all that you choose to do. The ranking system belongs to Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii, not to me. :-)

The cool thing about those rankings is that the 'bot picks them up nightly and puts them in the table with the rankings; see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethnic groups articles by quality/1 for examples (scroll down a bit; no comments on the highest-ranked articles).

Do you have a link to your summary tables on the WikiProject page? I forget...

But do whatever you want! They belong to the WikiProject..

.. do you want me to do it..? --Ling.Nut 21:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Hawaii articles by quality
• --Ling.Nut 22:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• there's also a mini-summary table — I dunno if you remember seeing it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii#Assessment_system.2C and typo on the project page — you can copy/paste it from the talk page of WikiProject Hawaii by editing the section "Assessment system, and typo on the project page" and looking for the appropriate template.--Ling.Nut 22:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Any thoughts on enabling automatic assessment of stub-class articles to populate the lists/cats like the Military WikiProject? —Viriditas | Talk 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. WP:AWB. --Ling.Nut 02:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Tamony

Your main style guide should be Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). Sometimes there may be some fine point not included there; you may wanna see WP:MOS.

Drop me a line when it's finished; I'll take a look. :-) --Ling.Nut 21:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Check your Wikipedia email :-) --Ling.Nut 01:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• If you haven't rec'd an email yet, then just send me one. I'll send files. --Ling.Nut 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Advice about an obsessive updater

Viriditas, I've been impressed with your work on The Prestige and since you're a member of the Wiki Film Project I would like your advice. There were a couple spurious changes to the article's Cast list (addition of non-existent characters) which I reverted. Curious, I checked out the contributor (69.119.119.178) (I really have to check how to wikilink that!) and found a history of, shall we say, dubious edits, most regarding the Hollywood entertainment business.

A quick look at his/her edits shows that most are in the trivia category (list of films, roles, age, siblings, birthplace, etc.), but most cannot be verified (and many are erroneous). Also, contributions are voluminous, almost obsessive. I think most of her/his sources must be fan message boards or other publications; he/she also seems stalkerish about some celebrities. The user's talk page has a number of warnings about adding unverifiable entries, with accusations of vandalism. The user has been blocked a couple times, but seems to go on an editing spree as soon as the block expires.

I'm tempted to review a number of the user's edits for validity since many are in film articles, an area of interest for me, but I think if I start making corrections wholesale I'll ignite a flaming war (this user has been accused of online abuse of other Wiki contributors). Do you have any suggestions as to a productive path to pursue? I'm thinking a permanent block would be the answer, but since the user isn't intentionally vandalizing pages, I don't know if that's the appropriate route. However, does a consistent pattern of numerous, invalid edits constitute an actionable offense? Thank you. Jim Dunning 04:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hawaii geo stubs

How did you guess about the surfing? My user page. No I created the stubs ages ago using a map because it didn't seem covered. For the points and beaches and villages I suggest as you did that a list is created of Places of Hawaii by island e.g List of places on Maui which will include beaches, headlands, villages etc. I love Hawaaii visited in the year 2000 Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Unless you can find info to expand each of them then for the smaller places I dod suggest a redirect to the list.

I suggest : List of locations on Maui List of locations on Kauai etc. THis will include the headlands, beaches, smaller villages etc Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George Ewart

Hey Viri, thanks for the info. :) I haven't heard of George before, but it is possible he was very distantly related. Dad doesn't have any siblings, so I don't have many closely related Ewart rels, but there are quite a few in the very extended family. Anyway thanks for pointing that out to me, I found interesting. It's nice to see you back, but I hope you had a good break. :) Cheers, Sarah Ewart 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

LMAO at the section above: "Sock puppet allegation". That's the most hilarious thing I've read in ages!! I was actually laughing out loud as I read that report! I always suspected you were really Eddie's sockpuppet! :D Sarah Ewart 14:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I gave him another two months to think about it. The edits I looked at seem to be sneaky hoaxes that most editors probably wouldn't be too suspicious of if they didn't know the IP. Sarah Ewart 00:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Viri, just letting you know that I decided to extend the block to 6 months. Hopefully that'll give everyone some peace of mind. :) Sarah Ewart 03:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page discussion

Thanks for the tip. I looked at the two pages you linked to and posted on the second one. S.E.'s talk page is really the main place where this discussion has gone on, so I don't know what else to use for it.

Proposing deletion isn't an issue now. The article about Z.T.E. had an AfD discussion some time ago, and the decision was "Delete." Cognita 22:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This page links to the AfD discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zach_Tyler_Eisen

I understand that, in general, straying conversations on someone's talk page would be inappropriate. Since S.E. is the admin who last dealt with Z, however, she may be the best person to follow the discussion about what he's been doing. His article makes it easy to find out his little sister's address and phone number, assuming the girl is real – I say this because he makes up other kinds of things. His own and his parents' privacy is also a concern. How can we get the article deleted, as it was supposed to be? Cognita 00:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S.: If you meant that in this case it's best to post such comments on the talk page of Z's article, I'm afraid no admin would see them there. And, among the many things I don't know about Wikipedia, I don't know whether a blocked user is blocked from reading or only from editing. He's less likely to find me on someone else's talk page than on the talk page for his article. I'm trying to keep a low profile. With his history of vandalism, if I stuck my head out of the burrow, I could expect reprisals when his block expired (by the way, I think two months is too short and two years would be better). Cognita 01:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I was being fiercely protective, too, only with a different target. S.E. has taken care of the problem for now. I guess we're clear for another six months. Cognita 06:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

<copied from Cognita's page by Sarah>You did everything right, it's just that I've seen Sarah's talk page get so busy in the past, I felt bad for her, and I thought we could help cut down on her clutter by keeping the discussion somewhere else. You wouldn't believe how busy her talk page gets. It's clearly not my role to control entropy (or to pretend that I'm her secretary, heh). —Viriditas | Talk 07:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Viri. I do, most sincerely, appreciate you looking out for me. :) It's very nice to know that I have friends behind me. And I don't mind you being my secretary--I can send you some typing to do! ;) Sarah Ewart 13:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Creating user sub-pages

Viriditas, how do you create User sub-pages, such as your /to-do page? Thank you in advance? Jim Dunning 06:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Fountain for Review

Since you edited tremendously on The Fountain to improve the wording of the film article, I thought your insights would be helpful in its review of the recent GA status. I've attempted to address the wording on the article, but if you have any suggestions or ideas, feel free to share them or edit accordingly. --Erik (^talk/_contrib) @ 15:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WatchlistBot

I don't know what happened at the bot requests page. Some sort of odd caching thing I guess. Anyway, I'm caught up with other stuff, and could help with Hawaii if you want. My bot's pretty primitive really. I don't get any info about how active articles are, or even if they're new. I know there are ways to get some of that info through the toolserver, but I'm not familiar with that. You might talk to User:interiot who had some similar ideas for WatchlistBot and also has experience working with the toolserver. I'm not spending much time on wikipedia these days, but I find small WatchlistBot jobs to be entertaining. I did tag all Hawaii-related categories awhile back when I was testing that as a new feature. At the time I noticed that there were a lot of untagged articles. I posted to the project page to ask if anyone wanted me to tag them, but got no response. This is something the bot is already set up to do, and I could do it easily if you're interested. I could do this for just stubs and stub categories, like you mentioned, or for the whole project. Ingrid 21:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm tagging completely untagged stubs right now. When it's done, I'll add the class parameter to unclassed stubs. After that, I can look into the other things you suggested. Can you tell me specifically how to determine those things (cleanup, merge, etc). I can easily find articles which contain a specific template, or which are in a specific category. Finding overlap is also easy. That is, articles which are in a Hawaii category and tagged with a cleanup template. Or in a Hawaii category and also in a cleanup category. Ingrid 04:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PocKleanBot

Well, I think we knew that would happen. Nobody likes a nag! :) Listen, I think there is still a need for this bot if you go with my original idea concerning WikiProjects. Instead of leaving messages on user talk pages, you could update WikiProject categories, tables, and discussion pages. Certain users could sign up with you to get detailed reports, and if necessary use the information to contact editors on a human to human basis. We need this bot, but we just need to put people on the frontline, not automated messages. I have to run right now, but when I return I will try and go into more detail. —Viriditas | Talk 22:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but no thanks, I've withdrawn the bot and I'm going to move on, too many people had too many colourful ocncerns about this bot. It's too much hard work this way trying to get a bot through approval etc. It really did surprise me how irate some people got about a small message left with good intentions on their talk page. I'm going to just volunteer my services at "bot requests" from now on and develop any bots people want making on the proviso that they get the bot approval and I'll do the coding for them. I hate getting dragged into debates. I like writing wikipedia articles and I life writing bots, but I hate getting dragged into justifications for both so I'll stay clear as far as possible :-) - PocklingtonDan 22:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

...for all your hard work, and for dealing gracefully with all the flak you have received over PocKleanBot. I still think we can accomplish your noble goals by diffusing articles marked for cleanup into the relevant WikiProject categories, which should be contained under Category:Wikipedia cleanup categories (but most are not yet listed). WikiProject Hawaii, for example, would like to have a cleanup table updated based on article categories, and reports generated on a weekly basis for newsletter distribution. A WikiProject cleanup taskforce could opt-in to receive these updates or just view them on a project page. The cleanup process could benefit from this bot. I think this bot can also be used as an opt-in feature, similar to SuggestBot. For example, a cleanup task force could opt-in, and your bot could scan their edit contribs for similar articles needing cleanup. Or, Wikipedians listed by interest could put their money where their mouth is, and opt-in to cleanup articles based on that criteria. Any way you choose to do it, as long as you give the user the option, it will be successful. Unfortunately, automatic unsolicited talk page messages go against the prevailing culture of Wikipedia, and due to human psychology, nagging has a negative perception. I share your desire to speed up the cleanup process, and I hope we can work together to achieve those goals. Please don't take any of this personally; consider this failed bot run as an opportunity to improve your bot. We need you, and as your bot approval page demonstrates, you have support. Again, your efforts are greatly appreciated. —Viriditas | Talk 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments but I've taken too much heat over this one and I'm just not interested in continuing with it - PocklingtonDan 08:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canvassing

In MY opinion, I think you're okay with contacting the members of a Project because they've signed up for the project, so it's like an opt-in, which is different from PocklingtonDan's bot, which was contacting people whether they had indicated they were interested in being contacted or not. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] small option of template

Viriditas,

The option to change the template size is becoming quite popular. I could arrange it so that the current version is completely unchanged, but an option for a smaller version is possible. I'm working on a small option at Talk:Popora people. Compare that to what you see on Talk:Hoanya people. The difference is that one has the small=yes option set (but that version is not done yet...)

I've already added a couple tags to the Hawaii template (before I saw your comments). It's very far from finished though.

Later --Ling.Nut 01:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)