User:Bishonen/My saved bits

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Tip for RfA report

If you want to override the formatting on the rfa report box you can do something like this:

{| align=left !important;
|{{Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/RfA Report}}
|}
<div style="clear:left;"></div>

That is what I am doing User:HighInBC#Current_RfAs. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 16:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History merge

Delete page B

Move A over B

Delete A

Undelete A (this restores all revisions from both A and B)

Move A to the name you want for it.

[edit] Protect against recreation

Create page with the content {{deletedpage}}, then protect as usual.

[edit] Arbcom mailing list

arbcom-l@wikimedia.org

cc to dgerard@gmail.com will get David Gerard to notice it.

[edit] Removing warnings and planting templates

My October 2006 comment about Bonafide.Hustla removing warnings is here. Contains useful ANI links. The big removing-warnings discussion is here. A message about not planting templates on established users, nor giving them links to our policies, is here

[edit] My wolfbox

This user is a sockpuppet of Thewolfstar as established by their edits and CheckUser, and has been blocked indefinitely.
See contribs — page moves — all logs — block log

Bishonen/My saved bitsBishonen/My saved bits

Remove Category colons!

[edit] Letter from Jimbo

INVOLVING JIMBO


I'd like to add some additional recommendations for people who'd like to appeal such cases directly to me (Jimbo).

First, it's very important that you write me a minimum of six pages of text explaining and defending the version that you prefer. The more tedious details, the better. I'm specifically keenly interested in the names of obscure rivers in Germany Poland Prussia. Also, be sure to write to me about the shape of Bigfoot's head. I really am the person to make a decision about that.

Second, everyone knows that I make it a routine practice to force articles to read exactly the way that you like. I also ban longtime users and sysops whenever I feel like, just based on the say-so of people just like you. So be sure to ask for that.

Third, better yet, don't ask for it, demand it. Threaten to leave if I don't comply within 24 hours. That always works.

Fourth, if you happen to know that I'm personally politically sympathetic to your point of view, feel free to call your opponents names. For example, since I'm generally sympathetic to Israel, feel free to call anyone who has written anything critical of Israel a "Nazi." I'll get so excited that I'll probably ban them. Heck, I might even write new code in the software to only let you and people you approve edit the pages!

And finally, if for some insane reason I don't act on your wise proposals, tell everyone that you know that Wikipedia is all a scam to make money. It's a tool of capitalist oppression. It's a liberal playground with no standards. It's based on the principles of communism. It's collectivist. It's individualist. It's useless. It's the most important thing in the world, except for me screwing it up. That'll show old Jimbo who he's messing with!

Jimbo Wales 13:32, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Other templates

{{subst:reincarnation|diff|article}}, with info inside {{subst:reincarnation|http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Islam_and_anti-Semitism&diff=prev&oldid=57260704|Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency}} gives


Welcome to Wikipedia! We're delighted that you've magically stumbled upon our web site, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. It's marvelous that you already know so much about editing Wikipedia, from wiki syntax to policies and guidelines. It's very rare that new users learn so much on the same day, so congrats! Also, I'm glad to see that you're being bold! [Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency] All of the edits that you're making on [[{{{2}}}]] resemble the same kinds of edits made by recently-banned users; it's a relief that their merit is not tarred by the reputation for bad faith of their originators. I'm now confident about the integrity of those edits. It's not every day that new users crop up out of nowhere to continue carrying the torch (well, I guess that does happen every day, but, oh well), so I'm very excited about your enthusiasm, and very happy that you decided to dive in. Please don't hesitate to ask anybody if you have any questions. Good luck, and happy editing! :-)

Welcome to Wikipedia! We're delighted that you've magically stumbled upon our web site, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. It's marvelous that you already know so much about editing Wikipedia, from wiki syntax to policies and guidelines. It's very rare that new users learn so much on the same day, so congrats! Also, I'm glad to see that you're being bold! [Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/His excellency] All of the edits that you're making on [[:{{{2}}}]] resemble the same kinds of edits made by recently-banned users; it's a relief that their merit is not tarred by the reputation for bad faith of their originators. I'm now confident about the integrity of those edits. It's not every day that new users crop up out of nowhere to continue carrying the torch (well, I guess that does happen every day, but, oh well), so I'm very excited about your enthusiasm, and very happy that you decided to dive in. Please don't hesitate to ask anybody if you have any questions. Good luck, and happy editing! :-)

Well, or it would if it worked. :-(


For them as post warnings:

Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're absolutely sure they have committed it. In particular, avoid using the word in edit summaries (such as "reverting vandalism"). Review the vandalism policy thoroughly before you do that, and see especially the section "What vandalism is not". Note that content disputes are not vandalism, and that good-faith edits of any kind, even if you think them misguided, are not to be considered vandalism. Vandalism accusations without any basis in policy are bad for the climate on the wiki and make constructive discussion more difficult. See WP:VAND: "If a user treats situations which are not clear vandalism as such, then it is he or she who is actually harming the encyclopedia by alienating or driving away potential editors."

{{vww}}:

Please don't accuse editors of vandalism unless you're absolutely sure they have committed it. In particular, avoid using the word in edit summaries (such as "reverting vandalism"), and be very careful about posting vandalism warning templates on user's talkpages. Review the vandalism policy thoroughly before you do that, and see especially the section "What vandalism is not". Note that content disputes are not vandalism, and that good-faith edits of any kind, even if you think them misguided, are not to be considered vandalism. Vandalism accusations without any basis in policy are bad for the climate on the wiki and make constructive discussion more difficult. See WP:VAND: "If a user treats situations which are not clear vandalism as such, then it is he or she who is actually harming the encyclopedia by alienating or driving away potential editors."

[edit] Blocked User:Peterklutz editing anonymously: How do you do a range block with the new software again..?

I'm hoping that with the new software we can finally effectively shut out the disruption of indefinitely blocked inveterate edit warrior Peterklutz (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) on the Transcendental Meditation-related pages. Please see his sockpuppet category page here; most of the IPs are from a single range. What am I supposed to do to block the ranges and not get any collateral damage, again...? (Please note, I don't really want you to tell me, I want YOU to do it. Yes, you! :-P) And also, should I have ticked the "don't allow new account creation" box when I just now tempblocked the IP he just used, 213.112.235.121 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)? Because I didn't. Bishonen | talk 12:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC).

Ignoring the fact that you don't really want advice, you should rangeblock just as you would before, but be sure to check the "block anonymous users only" box. If he has a history of creating usernames to evade blocks, then you want "prevent account creation" checked; if not, leave it unchecked to minimize collateral damage. Essjay (Talk) 12:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
That's what I figured about the username creation. Essjay, I'm sorry if I sounded outrageously lazy, but the problem is I've never known how to do range blocks. After reading all the don't-try-this-at-home-if-you-re-a-luser-because-you-could-really-do-some-damage warnings plastered over the range block information, I didn't try. So "just as I would before" is what I'm doing. Please? Bishonen | talk 12:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC).
If you go to http://www.dnsstuff.com/ and type the address you are looking at into the infobox labeled "CIDR/Netmask", it will return a range table that should answer the question. Thatcher131 14:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
The simplest-to-do rangeblocks are /24's; in most cases, it gets what you want without doing too much damange. (A /24 is 256 addresses, everything from 12.34.56.0 - 12.34.56.255; you block 12.34.56.0/24 and it takes them all out.) I went ahead and pulled his range and blocked it for 24 hours; it's 213.112.235.0/24 in case you need it in the future. I put a note in the block reason directing questions about it to you. :) Essjay (Talk) 14:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

... Oh, all right. Thank you both. . May I ask where there is a log of these kinds of blocks? Bishonen | talk 20:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC).

This is the range to block for Hollow Wilerding: 64.231.0.0/16. Anons only, two-three hours, we shall see if accouont creation needs disabling.

[edit] Template for references

{{cite book | author=Whitten, Tony | title=The Ecology of Sumatra | publisher=Periplus | year=2001 | id=ISBN 9625930744}}

gives

Whitten, Tony (2001). The Ecology of Sumatra. Periplus. ISBN 9625930744. 


It looks like there's no room for place of publication, but all you have to do is this:

{{cite book | author=Whitten, Tony | title=The Ecology of Sumatra | publisher=London: Periplus | year=2001 | id=ISBN 9625930744}}

to get

Whitten, Tony (2001). The Ecology of Sumatra. London: Periplus. ISBN 9625930744. 


For me, it's simpler to just write it, but that won't satisfy, I expect. At least this one's simpler than the horrible template used for Belton House.


See WP:CITE for more.

[edit] Sock tags

Suspected, with category:

{{Subst:Sockpuppet|1=Israel shamir|evidence=[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel_Shamir&action=history]}}

Puppeteer: {{puppeteer}}

It is suspected that this user has used one or more accounts abusively.
The abuse of multiple accounts is prohibited; using new accounts to evade blocks or bans results in the block or ban being extended.
See block log and lists of suspected and confirmed accounts.

[edit] Smileys

Image:SoleteRayos.gif


Image:SoleteRayosÑajo.gif


Image:Venusino-smiley.gif


[edit] Article contribution counter

Is here.

[edit] User contribution counter

Is here, or was in November 2006. This is Interiot's tool. Very informative, actual article titles, etc. Slow, but who cares?

[edit] Formatting text

To make something stand up.

To make something stand up.

To make something stand down

To make it really big.

To make it blink like this

To make it red

To gray it out

To make it red another way


To make something stand down

[edit] Blocking IP ranges

From Lucky's page.

It's actually not that difficult. Basically...say the user is using 129.54.23.34. If you wanted to block everyone in the 129.54.23.34 range, you would type in 129.54.23.0/24. That would block everyone that has an IP address that starts with 129.54.23, If you wanted to block the 129.54.23.0 and 24.0 ranges, you'd type in 129.54.23.0/23. 129.54.23.0/22 would block 23.0, 24.0, 25.0, 26.0. it's in multiples of 2. So /21 would block 8 ranges. /20 would block 16, etc. Hope that makes sense. :) It's actually not that complex. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 03:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The pissy autoblocker/WBardwin thing, according to JRM

From User talk:WBardwin[1]

Note left for User:DragonflySixtyseven -- Please be aware that when you place a block on a IP address used by AOL, you rarely hit your target. Instead, innocent users get blocked for other's vandalism or misbehavior. Such IP addresses, including the one below, are on a list available to administrators and should never be blocked for long/indefinate periods of time. I have a long history of being impacted by such blocks. Please see User:WBardwin/AOL Block Collection for a history and decisions made on this problem. I would appreciate a prompt release of this and related blocks. Thank you. WBardwin 09:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Your IP address is 207.200.116.134. Your user name or IP address has been blocked by DragonflySixtyseven.
User:207.200.116.134 has not been blocked recently; the only IP addresses User:DragonflySixtyseven has blocked recently are User:65.117.158.6 and User:67.82.159.228. Were you hit by the autoblocker again? If so, you need to provide the name of the account that was blocked, since it was a registered account that was blocked, not your IP address. Registered users' IP addresses are private and administrators do not have access to them. Please don't imply that DragonflySixtyseven had any way of knowing that an AOL IP address would be autoblocked by his block. Copying the entire block message here will allow us to quickly unblock you. — Knowledge Seeker দ 09:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand it either. I've e-mailed JRM, that's the best I can do. Bishonen | talk 11:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC).

Let's go over MediaWiki's ever so helpful and privacy respecting block system again, and why it's hardly optimal.

What happened here is that DragonflySixtyseven blocked a registered user who was being an ass. Which one is impossible to tell in retrospect. Said registered user then tried editing while logged out (clever!). In response, the autoblocker kicked in and blocked that address for 24 hours. Now, where is that address in the block list?

Nowhere, because "to respect privacy" (we all know how sensitive IP addresses are, especially of AOL proxies) IP addresses are obfuscated. So it will have been something like #XXXXX, with X a digit. If I'm not mistaken, WBardwin should have gotten a message that told him he was blocked by DragonflySixtyseven, but I do not know the reason it specified. The system should provide a reason that looks like this: "autoblocked because your IP address has been used recently by [[User:Foo]]". With this block reason in hand administrators can look in the logs and find the obfuscated IP address that's targeted by this. Without this, they cannot. You could try to find the block based on the time of the message, but this is unreliable.

Who is to blame? The developers. There are at least three ways of solving this problem, some complementary:

  • If the autoblocker blocks someone, make it clear the autoblocker is doing it and not the administrator involved in the original block. Make this abundantly clear in messages, too. Add the time of the original block.
  • Implement a blacklist of addresses the autoblocker must never block automatically, or at most a few minutes, just like administrators are required to do.
  • Turn off the stupid autoblocker. If people log out and continue to edit, require administrators to do the re-blocking themselves. The autoblocker has proven to be incompetent. Apropos privacy: why should a blocked user who tries to evade the block have his IP address kept secret? You forfeit your right to have your IP address kept a secret when you violate our policies. Anonymous users are treated no better.

In the meantime, the most productive "codes of conduct" for everyone involved are:

  • If you're an innocent user hit by a block, ask the administrator (or an administrator) to unblock you. Mention your IP, the block reason, and the fact that you are using an AOL proxy. Do not imply the administrator must have blocked you directly and ignored the AOL block list; it's very well possible they didn't. To play it safe, you can contact an administrator of which you know they understand all this. You don't necessarily need the original admin to do it.
  • If you're an administrator, educate yourself on proxies, the autoblocker, and How Stuff Works (tm). The last thing we need is ignorant admins going "I don't understand, I didn't block you, should I unblock you?" See if the IP specified really is an AOL proxy. If it is, unblock without question. Simply enter the IP address with a block time of 0, this should release the block regardless of how it came to be, and you won't need to delve into the blocked addresses list. (Disclaimer: I don't know if this works; I "seem to recall" it does/did.)
  • If you're a developer, just go on doing whatever it is that you're doing. There aren't enough of you anyway to fix these things, so don't bother. Thanks for the autoblocker, though; it's a real help. JRM · Talk 16:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin tools

[edit] Deletion tools

[edit] Mediation

Mediators can be found at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee, use e-mail to approach one privately. I can either do that, or post a request on WP:RfM. This comes from Sannse on irc 050304. But it's borked. There is a new page as of July 2005, Wikipedia:Wikimediation. There is an even more unofficial one at WP:TINMC.

But if I want someone to pass messages and be my språkrör, what I want isn't a mediator at all, but someone from Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates. That was a bit of a disaster when I tried it in March 2005, but I suppose it's all the luck of the draw.

[edit] Little boxes

Either do like on my Talk, or use this "divbox", which looks much simpler (but is nominated for deletion :-().

[edit] A cool way to search Project Gutenberg

A message to the C18 mailing list:

Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:39:47 EST From: Jim Chevallier <JIMCHEVAL@AOL.COM> Subject: A cool way to search Project Gutenberg

Which is to say, to search a good portion of the world's literature.

For a while I've used the Greenstone search tool to search Gutenberg:

http://public.ibiblio.org/gsdl/cgi-bin/library?site=localhost&a=p&p=about&c=gberg&ct=0

But it has a variety of limits.

Now I've discovered this 'Advanced Search' tool:

http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/search

Which works a bit more like Gallica - that is, it brings up the search text in context so that you can check that before loading the whole document. Very convenient.

[edit] Messages to vandals and other warnings

Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism

test2a is for them as blank pages.

blatantvandal is a once-only warning

test4im is a tougher once-only warning

Lots of warning templates; NPA, 3RR, etc

[edit] Dashes

Use the n-dash, it goes like this: "&" and then "ndash" and then ";" (nowiki code not working!!?)–semicolon, not colon!–which becomes on the page: –. And try to decide, already, whether to space around it or not, for my own content (don't change anybody else's choice of style). OK, I'll go with the no spaces.

Full-dress treatment and portal to other punctuation marks in Dash.

[edit] To purge server cache

Make an URL on this pattern and hit return: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates&action=purge

[edit] Diverse MEMOS AND LINKS

Page of metalinks and shortcuts about copyright etc, very useful!

Wikipedia:Manual of Style

Wikipedia:Cite sources, which is part of the Manual of Style

Wikipedia:Guide to layout, which is part of the Manual of Style

Minimum waste of time

Wikipedia:Requests for sysop attention, perhaps superseded by WP:AN and/or WP:AN/I?

New pages

Kate's tools old

Kate's tools new

Interiot's tool

[edit] How to find an old FAC discussion

The addresses look like this: [2]

[edit] References vs External links

What of an external link that's a reference? Apparently that's one for the "References" section, since Filiocht said in an FAC comment that "The external links that served as references need to go to a references section, along with any print refs that were used". OK, do I ever even put in any external links that are not used as references? Probably not, but other people do.

[edit] To do "strike through"

Write like this to produce the headline: <del>To do "strike through"</del>

[edit] To put new article on Did You Know

To put/suggest a newly created (less than 72 hours old) article on "Did you know" on the Main page: go to Template:Did you know or Template talk:Did you know and try to figger what they're talking about (never worked yet).

[edit] To write comments in the edit field that don't show up on the page

Write like this: <!--More coming on the Kit-cat club later-->

[edit] To make a blockquote

Put <blockquote>my text</blockquote>

[edit] Footnotes

As of October 8, 2005: Just use Wikipedia:Footnote3, the footnote 1, 2, and 4 templates are now deprecated.

Example of good use of footnotes: The Country Wife.

Compare example of good use of inline refs, for books that can be referred to very simply: John Vanbrugh.

Will some people insist on Inote, i. e. invisible notes? I will argue against that at all times. Nichalp objected to a FAC on the ground that it used footnote3 rather than inote. 'strordinary. :-( OTOH it's followed by debate (including a protest from Raul), and there Nichalp says "I never said that, just use footnotes sparingly." OK, just as long as nobody insists to the death on inotes, I'm good. There's a kind of official summary of the disadvantages of inote here, in case of quarrelling.

Here: "Note: Even if a Wikipedia article does use footnotes, it must also have a complete list of sources in the "References" section at the end of the article."

[edit] External links in text vs. at the end (discussion)

A Talk:Cite sources section


[edit] Templates

Note the code in this section for getting the template shown instead of executed!

  • Tables: Fredrik put the template {{subst:prettytable}} into Krag-Jørgensen, check out how it's used there. It expands to:

class="wikitable"


Put {{bookcover}} to get: Bookcover.

  • To say This article is currently undergoing a major edit. As a courtesy, please do not make edits to this article while this message is posted, in order to avoid edit conflicts: put {{inuse}} at the top of article, DON'T FORGET TO SAVE RIGHT AWAY, and then REMEMBER TO REMOVE IT AFTERWARDS.

Or use the {{inusefor}} template like this: {{inusefor|1 hour to fix the images}}, which displays thus: Inusefor

Tip from ALoan.

Bishonen: The text {{copyvio2}} does it. :) See also Wikipedia:Templates. KeithTyler 18:42, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

  • Kind of useless. When I asked if adding the template would really automagically list the article as suspected copyvio, he said "good question" and referred to the page that I had just been explaining I couldn't make head or tail of. Conclusion: no point in researching any more copyvios, that only annoys people (cf. Cyrius) when I don't do the complete operation, which I still can't. G. can't either.
  • Votes for deletion: Go to the page you want to delete and insert {{subst:vfd}} (not just {{vfd}}) at the top of that page. List on WP:VfD.
  • To list a category for deletion: Go to the category page you want to delete and insert {{cfd}} at the top of that page. List on WP:CfD
  • Speedy: put {{delete}} at the top of the page. "You can also add it to the list at the bottom of this page, but you don't have to." It gets added automagically (not to this list, but somewhere else , so I only list it if I need to write a comment.
    • Hey, simpler to use the Delete Because template! Put as it might be {{deletebecause|Islamonazi went through VfD and died. This is just a repost}}, then I needn't list it at all!
  • To say "This article is partially based on content from the public domain "Owl Edition" of Nordisk familjebok", put {{owl}} at the bottom of the page or under references.
  • To say "This article uses text from A Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century A.D., with an Account of the Principal Sects and Heresies [3] by Henry Wace", put {{WaceBio}} at the bottom of the page or under references.
  • To say "Please stop adding nonsense to the Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.", put {{test2}} at the top of the page (the user Talk page, that is.)


[edit] Words as words

Italicize words when they are being written about, rather than being used to write about what they refer to. Similarly for letters.

  • The term panning is derived from panorama, a word originally coined in 1787
    • The term ''panning'' is derived from ''panorama'', a word originally coined in [[1787]]
  • The letter E is the most common letter in English.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/i/s/User%7EBishonen_My_saved_bits_54a0.html"