User talk:CliffC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] I did not vandalize the page pal
The Queen of England was shown in the South Park episode. She was clearly Elizabeth you fucking dumbass.
[edit] Reply
You mean like this? [1] I think they are just tightening up category listings, so that the category will display its contents in alphabetical order. Let me know if you have any specific concerns. --Guinnog 12:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spam
Thank you for sharing your concerns with me, I will have a look. For future reference, you may add {{subst:spam}} --~~~~ to the user talk page of someone editing in this way, as I have just done with the user in question. Don't hesitate to ask if there is anything else I can help you with. Best wishes, --Guinnog 14:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've manually removed all the links this user added to that site. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Guinnog 15:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Google robots crawl the User pages? !!
Oh yes, everything we post here is googleable, if that's a word! --Guinnog 01:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Durer
Yes I meant to lose that one - 1903! I think I had deleted most of the things it referenced. My stuff mainly cojmes from Bartrum, but I have just put her in as a book , not 97 refs. I'm done for tonight (nosing around Goya now) so please do your worst. I'm very much learning Wiki style Johnbod 04:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Cliff, as basicly a writer not an editor by temprament, though i try to be good, I would LOVE a compulsive whatever-you-called-yourself following me around, so do please look at my page where I list & link all my contributions - mostly art especially printmaking pre 1830 Johnbod 05:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 01:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Jeanine Pirro
I'll do better than that, I will watch it for the next few hours at least as I will be in doing some work on the computer anyway. THanks for the heads-up! --Guinnog 13:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:64.59.200.43
Thanks. Let me know if this user vandalises again today and I will block. --Guinnog 18:12, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Video art editing
Hey--just saw your revert on video art. I was confused by that as deletion well, but actually the original edit had removed some repeated text (which may have been my fault initially--I did some reworking of that paragraph and may have left a couple of sentences after the paragraph). I'm going to revert it to the one before your edit since that's actually correct.Freshacconci 15:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks a lot for your messages. I cleaned up the non-notable book refs and left the user a message, and warned the other one. Another time there would be no harm at all in just being bold and doing what I have done, then perhaps checking with me. Very best wishes anyway. --Guinnog 02:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rejected Contributions
Hi Cliff,
First of all, i would like to thank you for your contribution on WikiPedia. I do want this website to maintain its excellent reputation.
However i do disagree with your withdrawal of my contributions. I think i made a valid point about "Third-party corroboration" on the Click Fraud page...
"Some Third-party corroboration solutions can display a custom pop-up message after a set amount of fraudulent clicks within a set period of time. This can be a good way to overcome unwanted clicks from Advertising Competitors. Nervous competitors may be concerned that Google can track their clicks."
This is discussed in more detail with other methods of preventing click fraud on my website. I has spent a large amount of effort creating a non-commercial resources section to my website. This information is available for free to web browser, hence why I believe why my link should be valid. At the very least, I believe my comments above are valid.
I don’t think it’s fair to presume everyone is "Link Spamming". Believe me, I could think of far easier ways to do so.
Please don't take this as an insult or as a personal attack.
Thanks --nPresence 12th Dec 2006
- Hi nPresence - as far as the text in Click fraud is concerned, it was not rejected, but simply reverted along with the link you added. I am not an expert on click fraud, so I personally have no issue with the text (but of course like everything else on Wikipedia somebody else might); I just happen to have Click fraud on my Watch list because it attracts a lot of commercial links. I sympathize with you because I know how hard it is to get a business name or product "out there" at the beginning. As far as adding the link to either article, Wikipedia rules are clear on this, "Adding external links to an article for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed". However, take a look at item 6 in Wikipedia:Spam#How not to be a spammer and the guidelines in template {{welcomespam}}. Best regards. --CliffC 02:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- CliffC, Thank you again for spending your time explaining this to me. I am not a Commercial Click Fraud site. I am not an affiliate nor do I promote any Click Fraud software. I do however have articles on how to combat click fraud. Some of the information on my articles are "opinionated" and not confirmed, hence why I didn’t add it to the Wiki Page. I was certainly not trying to get a business name or product "out there" --nPresence 09:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Vikasramachandran
Cliff
Thank you very much for bringing this to my attention. I have deleted the information and indefinitely blocked the account. Best wishes, --Guinnog 19:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spreading a long link or other string across multiple lines in the editor
For example, the LA Times citation links in article Thomas Kinkade are so long they make any diff they apperar in ridiculously wide, and when pasted into an article they make the article 'jump' inside the edit window. Is there some way to break these up across multiple lines so that they get recombined in the article without inserting spaces? My HTML was never that great and I don't see a wiki construct for this. Something like the following would be nice
<allonestring>|url=hhttp://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/1112584561.html?dids=1112584561: 1112584561&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+29%2C+2006&author=Kim+Christensen&pub=Los+Angeles+ Times&edition=&startpage=C.1&desc=Painter+Said+to+Be+Focus+of+FBI+Probe</allonestring>
If there's something really obvious, it's OK to embarrass me.<g> Thank you. --CliffC 01:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- You can name the link, i.e. [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/1112584561.html?dids=11125845611112584561&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Aug+29%2C+2006&author=Kim+Christensen&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&edition=&startpage=C.1&desc=Painter+Said+to+Be+Focus+of+FBI+Probe LA Times], producing LA Times—WAvegetarian•(talk) 02:03, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, you should rarely put the URL straight into the article anyway. Another option would be to put the url in a pair of square bracket after a punctuation mark, like this.[2] Xiner (talk, email) 02:08, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I guess my question wasn't clear; I'm really only concerned with how the link looks and acts in the editor or in a diff; this particular long line is part of a citation and there's no problem as the article is presented to the reader - that line is not seen by the reader. I just don't want to manage these super-long lines inside the edit box when I am editing the article. --CliffC 02:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think it hurts readability if you set up several text strings and add them up at the end. I also don't think it's worth the trouble for the editor. At least right now a reader can simply skip through that long URL b/c they can see what it is. As for the problem while you're editing it, leave out the long URL until u're reading to submit the post, then paste it in. Xiner (talk, email) 02:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
- I guess my question wasn't clear; I'm really only concerned with how the link looks and acts in the editor or in a diff; this particular long line is part of a citation and there's no problem as the article is presented to the reader - that line is not seen by the reader. I just don't want to manage these super-long lines inside the edit box when I am editing the article. --CliffC 02:22, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bonjour (Howdy)
Re Crane (machine): there is nothing really in Trolley (disambiguation) to describe the trolley on the Overhead crane. This needs to be fixed somehow. And indeed, the system got things sorted out. By the way, keep up your compulsive proof reading as there are plenty of typos to be found, especially in translations from other tongues.
Cheerio, Peter Horn 03:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Peculiar happening
I couldn't reproduce the fault. It did make me realise however that I have never edited the sandbox! --Guinnog 02:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] My reverting the Spyware IP editor
Yes, a mistake on my part ... I was in a kind of, well, maximum alert mode then - vandalbots running and lots of sockpuppets with multiple IPs, so I reverted on sight. So yes, I'll remove my warning and welcome the user instead. Cheers! Yuser31415 05:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Blatant vandal
Hi Cliff. In a case like that, I think we can justify using a {{subst:bv}} warning. Well spotted, thanks for your good work. --Guinnog 02:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] All is now well in Kearny NJ
I'm certainly glad to hear that. Keep up your good work. --Guinnog 02:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Snowman
Oh, it's no problem at all, you can leave the link on. :) I'm still looking for information on the history of snowmen...which seems to be a pretty impossible thing to find. If you have any sources that could help, do tell. → Icez {talk | contrib} 06:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Better Business Bureau
The Better Business Bureau was founded in part by Al Capone. If you follow the link within the existing article (http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff1343.htm), it says that. It also says it on this link. http://www.newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v257/__show_article/_a000257-000013.htm Shuim 15:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted this partly because Al Capone was only 13 years old in 1912, that was the first tipoff. I suggest taking a look at WP:Reliable sources. I like reading Ripoff Report too, but a side observation in some anonymous victim's complaint isn't a reliable source; nor is the anonymous item in your second citation, apparently someone's blog. My edit summary said "revert unsourced statement" to be polite; I hope the next reverter is as nice. --CliffC 16:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Thanks for fixing my user page
Haha that sounds like a good plan. Oh, and thanks for the thanks (or something!). Will (aka Wimt) 16:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Medal of Honor - awarded or received?
You make a valid point. If you change it back to "awarded", I won't change it back. I guess, the more I think about it, I don't mind "awarded" so much. I just hate it when people say someone "won the Medal of Honor". The two MOH recipients that I've met made it very clear that it wasn't a contest. Betaeleven 02:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Joseph Smith, Jr.
I guess I should RTFA before I make a change, eh? The phrase "Tarred and feathered" sounded odd to me, so I changed it without reading. Nice catch on my error. Flibbert 01:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I had an eighth-grade teacher who would threaten to do that (except for the leaving-for-dead part, of course) on a regular basis. I must admit you had me stumped with "RTFA" for a minute... "Oh, arrrrticle!". --CliffC 03:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Citation (Disambiguation)
Re your partial reversion - per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) and Wikipedia:Disambiguation, dab pages are only to be used to help readers navigate to wikipedia articles, they are not dictionary entries, so redlinks are not appropriate. Unless you can come up with a guideline reference or another really compelling reason, I'm going to remove the redlink again. As for the Cessna line, it's not at all promotional, it's that the "Citation" name was used on a bunch of different aircraft. Because of the complexity of the line, there are currently 5 different articles (with a 6th on its way), so this method is being used as one means to help the reader navigate to the particular Citation article he/she might be looking for. Akradecki 05:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry you felt I was wikilawyering. As for the Citation, to use your Ford analogy, if Ford called every one of their models "Taurus", then there would be massive confusion, and it would be appropriate to list the various Taurus articles on the DAB page. Such is the case with Citation. Why they decided to name very different aircraft the same name I've not idea, but they did. Remember the function of DAB pages: to enable our readers to navigate as easily as possible. That has been accomplished. Akradecki 01:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
