User talk:Kbdank71/Archive4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Cat:Villages in Canada

All due respect to those that are going to come here to complain about the deletion of this category. This category has been empty since it was created, 15 days ago. Common sense dictates that category creation be based upon existing articles needing to be categorized. Throughout all of the discussions, not one article has been categorized there. If and when someone has an article about a Canadian village, I'll recreate the category. If you still disagree with my actions, please leave a message after the beep and I'll be happy to discuss it with you. --Kbdank71 15:10, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Beep. uhm.. I forgot what I was gonna say, that damn beep is annoying. ;) Sorry I hadn't been able to clear up some of the back logged cats, still no cable. Went down to the Comcast office today, again, and they said they would fix it today, again.. Err.. of course they didn't. This really sucks, I have to drive to the other side of town to get online. Oh well, I'm doing my best to keep up though. ∞Who?¿? 02:07, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Funny thing is, I went to CfD yesterday, and thought, wow, nobody touched it, I might as well start taking care of the oldest day. I was half way through before I realized I was closing the 15th, a day early. Today I'm drinking my coffee first. And I think I'll just work on the backlog too. --Kbdank71 13:08, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
You know I was kind of wondering about that, I seen you did half, figured you just got buzy and left them. I started to do them too, and thought about the 7 day x 24 hour thing again, so I waited a few hours and finished closing them this morning. Most of them were ignored anyways. Put my bot on my laptop, gonna run it later tonite to clear up any big moves left on the list. ∞Who?¿? 17:32, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
I probably would have finished the northern ireland cats if I didn't run into a major problem at work. Damn picky employers, expect you to do work for pay...  :) --Kbdank71 18:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Eh, they were there so I gave them the boot. No no, the secret is to LOOK busy, have some silly "work related" items on the puter and your fiance on the phone posing as a someone "work important" :) Well I hope you got it taken care of tho. ∞Who?¿? 16:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Category:Hospitals by nationality

I think I must have missed something. Why has Category:Hospitals by nationality not been renamed to Category:Hospitals by country? Was I supposed to do it myself? I thought someone would be using a bot... Kappa 16:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

  • In order to do a category rename or delete or merge, the category needs to be listed at WP:CFD for discussion. After being listed for seven days, and having a consensus, it'll be taken care of by whoever is archiving that day. --Kbdank71 17:02, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Maybe there was no consensus then. Kappa 17:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
      • D'oh!.. How did we miss this. :) oops. oh well fixing it now. ∞Who?¿? 17:38, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Oh, crap. My apologies, Kappa. I checked back a few days to find the discussion, but not to the 13th. Sorry about that. --Kbdank71 18:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm. this was a bad CFD day (13 Sep). We both missed closing a couple. I wouldn't haven't even seen it if I didn't see you just closed another one in my watchlist. I closed the other two, moved on to SFD. Oh well, better late than never :) ∞Who?¿? 18:33, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Oh yea, I still haven't figured out what to do with "Category:Embassies in Ottawa", I didn't close it yet. Seeings they already moved everything before listing the CFD and now there is no consensus. So it would get deleted as an empty cat now anyways, just begs the question if anyone wanted moved, but no one complained either. ∞Who?¿? 18:38, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
      • I'll go back through and see what needs to be done. Or, I could just wait a few days and let you do it. When the hell was someone going to tell me your RfA was back up? Damnit, I almost missed my chance to say "yeah, me too!". I don't want to jinx you, but it looks like you're sailing through, so here's an early Congrats! --Kbdank71 19:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
        • hehe, well I thought about telling you, but I don't like it when other users go fishing for votes. I was hoping you would see it before it closed :) ∞Who?¿? 20:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
      • I deleted it. I took the "maybe this should have" comment to be just that, a comment. --Kbdank71 19:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
        • Yea, didn't think of that really. I thought about writing Spinboy a note about at least posting on Cfd before doing it, but that's kind of what being bold is about I guess. Oh well. ∞Who?¿? 20:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

D.C. categories

Hey, I am about to move the contents of Category:Washington, District of Columbia back to Category:Washington, D.C.. See this discussion and my comments, as well as comments here. And then have the other one speedied under CSD general #4. Wouldn't mind some backup on this if things go south. :) Hey wait, I'm in the south. ∞Who?¿? 20:22, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

  • I've read the comments and the CfD discussions. Looks clear cut to me. I'll back you if you get any heat. --Kbdank71 20:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Cfd stuff

Hey, I'm going on a trip. Leaving tomorrow morning (28 sep 11:30 UTC) and probably be back Tues. I asked Splash to help close until then, if time permits. I started to close the 21st, may finish it up tonight. ∞Who?¿? 03:00, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I'll reply here, since I figure all the eyes are watching this. Yes, I'll call by CfD and see what needs closing that doesn't get done before I get there. -Splashtalk 03:03, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
I'll take care of whatever is left. Heh, all eyes are watching this. That's funny. --Kbdank71 13:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
They are! Guettarda 14:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Right! Who else? (Why the bloody hell isn't there a "Who is watching this page" link in the toolbox?) --Kbdank71 14:10, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Maybe not all eyes, but certainly some (you don't have anything to hide, do you?). -- Rick Block (talk) 14:34, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
You want it, you got it, Toyota. Err, I mean.. Here is your Who is watching this page link. :) ∞Who?¿? 20:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Hey, just incase it got buried in the watchlist, left you a msg here. ∞Who?¿? 09:16, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

cities in foo

Hi - I put the cities in foo categories under speedy, since I thought there was a 2-day "object now or forever hold your peace" rule (for cfd speedy renames). Is there some reason this isn't necessary in this case? -- Rick Block (talk) 23:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Hi. That would seem to be my mistake. The last time I actually looked at the instructions, it said "may be removed without delay". I guess I should RTFM more often.  :) --Kbdank71 13:44, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

is it policy or not

Hi - user:CalJW and I seem to be somewhat at odds regarding the use of speedy to enforce the conventions specified at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories). Do you suppose you could comment either at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion or Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories)? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure I'm the right person for that job. I dropped out of the discussions for naming conventions some time ago (back when the polls sounded like a playground: "I want A", "I want B", "I want A", etc). User:Splash brought up a very good point on the naming conventions (categories) talk page, and he's been paying attention to it longer. You might want to tap him if you already haven't. My personal opinion, which I suppose I'll throw in there somewhere, is that if we have a convention in place, we should indeed be able to speedy said categories. I see where user:CalJW is having trouble with it. We shouldn't be American English-ing an international encyclopedia, and yeah, mistakes will happen. That said, speedies have two days for objections. There are enough people at CfD who would notice it. And if by chance something does get by, it's not hard to fix it. We have bots for that sort of thing. --Kbdank71 13:51, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Cat:Totalitarian dictators

You can't categorize people as "totalitarian dictators". It violates the NPOV policy. Please self-revert those categorizations. Everyking 14:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

  • See Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 September 23 for the Cfd discussion on the matter. There was no consensus to delete the category, and since it was depopulated while the discussion was ongoing, I merely repopulated it. --Kbdank71 14:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
    • But in repopulating it you made extensive POV judgments. Everyking 15:29, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
      • How do you figure? I was not judging who should have been in the category, that decision was made by whoever originally placed them there. --Kbdank71 15:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


{{Categoryredirect}}

Just as a side note, an unintended side effect of NekoDaemon is that it explicitly trusts who ever uses this template really intends to move every article and subcategory to whatever it needs to be redirected to. Meaning that should you need to move all the articles in one category to another, just place the template and redirect it appropriately. --AllyUnion (talk) 21:04, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Totalitarian dictators

I request that you get a second opinion on whether or not consensus has been established on the CfD for this category. Notice the overwhelming though not unamimous support for deletion; further, notice that the votes for delete were nearly unamimous in the more recent days, once an explanation on why putting the category in any single articles constitutes a violation of the neutral point of view policy was finally stated. On that note, even if the category survives, it must be added to any article on grounds of NPOV; so please stop repopulating the category. 172 | Talk 22:35, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

If not closed, I will try to get back online to review this discussion either Monday or Tuesday. ∞Who?¿? 09:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I wouldn't waste my time. User 172 is going to do whatever pleases him, regardless of whether he has a consensus or not. He's already proven this to be the case. It's funny how he wants a second opinion on the cfd discussion, when he unilaterally made the choice to empty the category. Great knowledge or not, if this is how he handles himself, I can't say I'm glad he came back. --Kbdank71 15:39, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
You're in no positions to throw stones. You too were a partisan in the CfD (voting to keep, and then repopulating the category), though on a side much further from consensus than my side. Then you closed the discusion and removed the article from CfD yourself (unilaterally-- I might add), although it was clear that the call on whether or not to delete was very borderline. Your actions certainly did not inspire much confidence in your own impartiality as an administrator on CfD... Nevertheless, we all make mistakes and there is hardly a reason to get so worked up about actions that are so easily reversed by clicking a mouse a few times. If you want to work with me civilly and cooperatively in the future, I can forget all about my own qualms about your own handling of this mess on CfD. 172 | Talk 21:50, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
At this point, even if the articles have been wrongly moved or placed, there is a strong consensus to delete. I quadrupled checked it. Even if some of the votes are misplaced due to impromptu depopulation, I can see no other recourse except to close it, but leave it unlisted for depop. This way the community gets to see the decision and act/re-act on the decision before any more is done. ∞Who?¿? 02:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I may be partisan in my politics, but not at CfD when closing discussions. If you want, I can point to plenty of categories that I voted one way but closed it the other because that's what the consensus was. My main problem with the handling of this was you prematurely de-populated the category. I know you said it was POV, but there were others that disagreed with you on that as well. When the seven days were up, I counted the votes, read the discussions, and while it was close, I determined that there was no consensus to delete the category. That is the reason I reverted you, and repopulated it. I had a job to do, and was doing it. If someone wants to relist it for deletion, like others have already mentioned to you, and the votes are there, I'll happily go ahead and delete it. I don't have a problem working with anyone here, but I do have a problem when respected editors ignore official policy. Apparently we both think the other handled this poorly. Well, that's one thing we agree on. And you're right, no need to get all worked up over this. It's just an encyclopedia. --Kbdank71 13:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I did not realize that 172 had removed the CFD tag, so the debate stayed open longer, which resulted in the delete consensus. I did not mean to change your original closure, as I did not know it was closed, I should have checked history. However, it staying open for longer than normal is not against any policy, though the tag removal was. I just deleted this category, after letting it stay unlisted for deletion to allow for any objections. Sorry Kris, I did not mean to squish your closure decision :) ∞Who?¿? 20:56, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
No need to apologize for something 172 caused. Besides, if we kept it around, we'd have had to listen to him about it further. --Kbdank71 21:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
No one has to apologize. It is not unheard of for CfD discussions to be kept up longer for a clearer consensus to be established. My decision to reopened the debate only had the effect of affording more time for more feedback and perspective. If anything, I should be thanked for my role in the ordeal, especially in removing the category from pages on leaders whom no political scientist and historian considers "totalitarian," such as the Somozas, the Duvaliers, Pinochet, and Suharto. For those leaders, including the category "totalitarian dictators" would be no less inaccurate than including (say) the category '1914 births' on people who weren't born in 1914. 172 | Talk 21:22, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

ecclesiastical state

Just reverted the categories for ecclesiastical state, but see that the subject was kept but not the category. Please explain why one and not the other?67.124.49.20 20:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

  • This category was chosen for deletion by consensus here. Your edits will be reverted, please check WP:CFD before making such changes. Thank you. ∞Who?¿? 03:01, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, however, just curious why would the subject remain but not the category?67.124.49.20 03:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Well the article itself is deemed as encylopedic, just the community saw fit that it was either not needed or an unencylopedic categorization schema. So the main topic itself is intact, it will just not be used as a category. I hope this explains it decently. Thanks for replying. ∞Who?¿? 04:03, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Who, thanks. You know me and the weekends...  :) --Kbdank71 13:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Yep, I figured you would be out of the office. Not a prob. ∞Who?¿? 20:52, 4 October 2005 (UTC)


Japanese emperor redirects

No need to bother with any of the Japanese emperor double redirects. The articles themselves are in the process of being moved, and what are now double redirects will be correct after the move. Thanks. -Jefu 01:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

US Reps by State

Oh yea, you think you can close the US Reps by State discussion. Yea, I know, I made one hell of a tangled mess, but I am too invovled in that discussion for me to seem neutral in closing. ∞Who?¿? 20:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I'll see what I can do. I got as far as looking up what Sisyphean task meant, and decided it would be less painful just to stick hot pokers in my eyes. I'll let you know when I'm done. --Kbdank71 13:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I hate to do this, but I closed both sections as no consensus. Here's why:
    • Section 1:
      • Members of the US House of Reps by state (4)
        • Who, NatusRoma, Markles, older!=wiser
      • United States Reps (2)
        • Reinyday, James F
      • Members of the United States House of Reps by state (1)
        • NatusRoma
      • Oppose (1)
        • SEWilco
    • Section 2:
      • US to United States (6)
        • Who, Splash, Siafu, James F, Markles, Steve Block
      • US Reps from foo (1)
        • Lou I
      • Members of the United States House of Reps from foo (3)
        • NatusRoma, Markles, Steve Block
      • Oppose (3)
        • SEWilco, tomf688, Caerwine
  • There was one in each section that had more than any other, but neither had a consensus. I'd wait a week or so and try smaller, like just do the subcats for consistency. Let that bubble through and then do the supercats. That might not work either, but at least closing it will be easier.  :) --Kbdank71 13:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Eh, that's cool. It wasn't my project anyhoo :) I just didn't want to tick anyone off since I restarted it and put a lot of work into it. Sorry it was so screwy, I hope your eyeballs are healing from the hot irons. ∞Who?¿? 18:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


CFD fun day

Oh what a fun day this is already :) Had a typo in the list of categories that needed to be moved and created wrong cat, no big deal really. Wanted to ask about undeleting some cats though. I left the cfd tag on 3, probably shouldn't have :), but they were part of an Arbcom case, not a minute after I told Instantnood I wasn't going to delete them yet, I looked and they were gone, my luck. I saw you deleted them, but then thought they still have their edit history intact, even deleted, so I figured I would ask you first about if we should leave them deleted or not. Its these 3 cats category:airports of the People's Republic of China, category:airports of Hong Kong and category:airports of Macau. Thanks. ∞Who?¿? 19:00, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Damn. I knew I should have stuck with fixing the double-redirects... :) Normally I'd say leave them deleted since they were empty anyway, but if they are part of an arbcom case, I'll go ahead and undelete them. Sorry about that. Funny thing is, I saw those and thought "That's a problem just waiting to happen", and next thing I know, "You have new messages". Live and learn. So, how's the weather? Back to normal? --Kbdank71 19:05, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Hehe. It was my fault for not de-tagging them and leaving a note. Sorry about that. Weather is great, right now anyways, just got back from Ohio, and it was raining, but it's beautiful today, always nice before the next hurricane :) ∞Who?¿? 19:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Japanese institutions

Hello Kbdank71, I maintain Portal:Japan and noticed that Category:Japanese institutions is now a red link. The edit history says that you deleted it. Can you tell me the name of the category that replaced it, so I can update the Portal? Thanks Fg2 09:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC) "02:57, October 8, 2005 Kbdank71 deleted "Category:Japanese institutions" (cfd)"

Hi that would be Category:Japanese organizations and you can find the discussion here. ∞Who?¿? 10:36, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks!Fg2 10:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
No prob, sorry, I just replied on your talk page too :) ∞Who?¿? 10:41, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Bombay Stock Exchange

Image:WikiThanks.png Thank you for your contribution at Bombay Stock Exchange.
Please keep it up!!! - P R A D E E P Somani (talk)
Feel free to send me e-mail. have a look at Indian subcontinent earthquakes list

Bored yet?

Something to pass the time.
Something to pass the time.

Well, it's not as tangled as CFD and the categories, but I'm sure if you mess with it for a few minutes you could have a big ugly ball of twine. If nothing else you could knit a sweater :) So are you having CFD withdraws yet, or are you enjoying time working on other things now? ∞Who?¿? 06:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

  • A little bit of both, to be honest. I still have CfD bookmarked, and I'll stop by and help out if it's needed. I really need to start voting again. Work has been a little busy lately, though, so whenever I'm at wikipedia it's on borrowed time. --Kbdank71 13:30, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Strike that. I don't need the additional stress. I'll help with closing and such, but I'm going to stay away from voting, at least while CalJW is there. We agree on many things, but on the ones that we don't, he completely rubs me the wrong way. Quite arrogant and pushy, and I have enough of that elsewhere. --Kbdank71 20:24, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
yea, Splash and I had a short discussion about some of that. I am not sure how to handle it at this time. Have been thinking of another polite note, although the ones I left in the past have always resulted in poor responses. It's good to do other stuff on Wiki though, sometimes I miss the todo list I had, CFD takes quite a lot, especially when you're really the only closing admin. It eats up quite a bit of time, I am surprised you had time to vote on stuff before. ∞Who?¿? 21:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
I just saw the comments on your and Splash's talk pages regarding him. I have a thought about him that I need to research. I don't know how I did it all. I know I skipped alot of work to do that on a daily basis. It is tough, that's true. If you need help, just let me know. I'll send you my work email so you can get ahold of me quickly. --Kbdank71 02:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the cleanup yesterday and today. I took a short break from blocking vandalbots to close the discussions last night, but really didn't look at them. Just copied them to "cleanup" :) New wiki change messed with my bot, so it's been running a bit sluggish, had to add a work around and watch it. I'm soo tired now, must sleep. Oh yea, I got your email. I probably won't email you at work unless I have to leave or something is terribly wrong. ∞Who?¿? 16:39, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Admin?

How do i become an admin? --daunrealist 18:38, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

  • See WP:RFA. ∞Who?¿? 18:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Gracias, amigo! --Kbdank71 19:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
  • If I could give you some advice, I wouldn't request adminship just yet. I checked over your contributions, and I know people will oppose right now because a) you haven't been here long enough, b) you don't have enough edits, and c) your edit summaries leave a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, (a) and (b) are subjective, and different people have different criteria. Your edit summaries can be fixed. If you really want to be an admin, you can start now by toning down your summaries. All that is needed is a summary of what you did. Commentary, especially personal attacks, is not appreciated, and will not get you promoted to admin. You might want to read Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility. --Kbdank71 19:24, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Ok, Thanks. I wasn't really planning to be one, just wondering. --daunrealist 21:07, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Peoples of Greece

I must protest your deletion of the Peoples of Greece category and replacement with Ethnic groups of Greece. The category includes groups such as the Maniots which do not identify as separate ethnic groups but rather as regional or cultural groups which are still Greek by ethnicity.--Theathenae 07:35, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

  • This category was merged/renamed per consensus discussion on this CFD. The category was tagged such and was open for 7 days for debate. The rename was to standardize all the names of the categories in the parent cat. If there are miscategorized articles now, consider soliciting help in recat'ing them. Thank you. ∞Who?¿? 08:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, what he said. (thanks again, who) --Kbdank71 14:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Well might as well

If you have a chance, take a look at my request on Meta. Note, this is an invitation to look, not a solicitation :) ∞Who?¿? 08:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Understood. Looking now. Good luck! --Kbdank71 14:29, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I will find more later, but figured you may want to have a say in it, or copyedit my work :)

Oh yea, thanks for the support on meta, that place is a mess. ∞Who?¿? 20:32, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I'll take a gander at it. What's going on at meta? I signed up and started fixing some double redirects (stupid things are addictive), but I'm not that familiar with it. --Kbdank71 20:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
Oh I meant that it's a mess as in there is no cleanup or maintenance. Basically a big cluster F*** censored for the kiddies . Most of the users on Meta are there to colloborate and then there's the admins, stewards and beureaucrats that have other jobs to do with all the other Wiki's. So I've been dividing my time up trying to straighten it out. The double redirects thing was next, as in way down the line next :) Glad you're doing them. I hated soliciting people to look at my rfa, but theres not really a lot of activity on Meta, it would just go unnoticed, but at least I got people's attention to the other RfA's as well. ∞Who?¿? 02:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Paris Metro stations

The "broken" links that you cleaned up were not entirely illogical. The policy for RER station links in List of stations of the Paris RER was to point them at uncreated (but correctly named) pages. A policy decided mainly by me, admittedly, on the basis of all the pre-existing stubs. This was why I directed uncreated RER station links incorrectly named "Metro" to their correctly named (and still uncreated) RER versions. Still, your change is perhaps a small improvement, for the very few people who might ever get confused looking for a page on Fontenay-sous-Bois station. Rollo 21:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

done with IE

Excellent! Next step - Mac. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh now MAC :) Nah, I used to program on MAC just for the RISC processing, same as my Amiga, but Intel (bleh) finally has a multi-processing CPU. Just cuz you have an Intel-based CPU doesn't mean you have to run MS :)
Btw, I just found this on CFD  ;-p
du-0 This person does not understand dumbass (or understands it with considerable difficulties, or does not want to speak dumbass).

«»Who?¿?meta 07:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

To be honest, I've been done with IE for a long while at home, but I couldn't get Firefox to work at work until yesterday. It's like a new lease on life! It's like a new job!! It's like... Well, it's like the same old job but with Firefox-y goodness.
As for Mac, that reminds me of a funny story. My sister bought an iPod, and was so impressed she bought a mac and now is strictly Apple. I just bought an iPod. I might get a mac at some point (money is tight right now, saving up for a wedding), but I probably won't give up my pc. --Kbdank71 14:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Your edit to the redirect KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA

You left an edit comment pointing to a double-redirect fixing project. Only thing is, you didn't fix a double redirect - you removed a category from a redirect page - in this case, one useful for informing people why this redirect existed ({{R from EXIF}}). Could you be careful about this in future? Thanks! —Morven 16:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I did both. The template in KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA causes it to show up in Special Pages:Double Redirects as redirecting to EXIF, then to Exchangeable image file format. As for why the redirect exists, one would think it's pretty obvious. KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA redirects to Kodak EasyShare DX6440, which, by the way, makes no mention of EXIF or Exchangeable image file format. Unless people go to the category in question, Category:Redirects from EXIF information, they won't know why the KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA redirects to Kodak EasyShare DX6440 (aside from the obvious), because the redirect just redirects, it doesn't explain why (template or no template). Another reason I think the template is pretty pointless is that there are no redirects at all for Kodak DX6440 zoom digital camera, Kodak DX6440 Zoom digital camera, Kodak DX6440 Zoom Digital camera, or Kodak DX6440 Zoom Digital Camera. So unless the user types it in in all caps, they're out of luck. There are thousands of redirects out there, many many many without "explanations". Somehow, I don't think visitors will be confused as to why a redirect exists, or indeed even know. And that is why I think templates that explain why an obvious redirect exists is a grand waste of time and resources.
That said, I will indeed be more careful. You might want to find a better way, however. There is currently talk of having the system take care of double redirects, either by stopping a user from creating one, or by fixing it itself. I know, the KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA isn't one. But the system thinks it is, and that's all that counts. So you may wind up with a bunch of articles suddenly redirecting to Exchangeable image file format. Personally, I think my way is better, but I've always admitted I'm not an expert. --Kbdank71 17:27, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
If it shows up in Special Pages:Double Redirects, then that's a bug; I'll report it.
The reason these redirects exist is that MediaWiki now creates automatic links in image description pages based on EXIF information inside the images themselves. For an example, look at Image:Toyota 2000GT.jpg. For these links to mean something, they must either point to pages or redirects. Most of the time, the names are a bit wierd; we wouldn't want to name our article that. So, we create a redirect to the right page. E.g. my camera, the Kodak DX6440, inserts the string "KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA" in the 'Camera Model' EXIF field. If I want that link to go somewhere, I need to create a redirect at KODAK DX6440 ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA. That's why just the all-caps version exists; it is there because of automatically generated strings, not because I expect a user to ever type that.
The problem is that over-zealous Wikipedia users go round doing things like deleting orphan redirects they don't see the point of. For that reason, and to keep track of these redirects, User:Grm wnr created Category:Redirects from EXIF information and placed all these odd redirects in that category, in the hope that a user who got delete-happy might check the category first. The problem is because these links on image description pages are automatically generated, nothing shows up in What Links Here for these redirects, even though things actually do redirect to them.
Can you think of any place that things like this should be discussed? There's certainly a point to what User:Grm wnr started and I reverted back to from your changes, but maybe someone can think of a better way. —Morven 20:08, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Ah, gotcha. I figured there had to be reason for it. Thanks for the background. I'm not sure where else this could be discussed, but I'll mull the issue over and see if I can come up with anything to do. --Kbdank71 20:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
As a side point, why doesn't the image show up in the "what links here" for the redirect? You'd think that since it does in fact link to it, it would show up. Unless it's a problem with images... --Kbdank71 20:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I think it's because those links exist but are not in article text, and only parsed article text updates the what-links-here table ... this could be construed as a bug, I believe. —Morven 20:30, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
  • In a semi-related matter, concerning file links on images, Sherool posted a bug BugZilla:3759 to ask them to implement a "Next X" link, so we can page through all the articles that link to an image. Just incase you want to comment. Btw, fixed that category link up there, so yer no longer in that EXIF cat. «»Who?¿?meta 21:22, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Hi, I just caught this on my watchlist - sorry if I was being a bit unclear on the purpose of these redirect, but Morven got it exactly right. As a discussion page, I would suggest Wikipedia talk:Missing EXIF redirects or Category talk:Redirects from EXIF information. By the way, these redirects do not only serve the English wikipedia - Last time I checked, the EXIF information on Commons also linked to the en articles. That's why some of these redirects would have no incoming links even if the EXIF tags were included in Whatlinkshere. -- grm_wnr Esc 01:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Category deletion

I'm curious as to why you deleted the Bisexual Wikipedians category.

I'd like to add myself to it, should it exist, to distinguish myself from gay or other non-hetro' Wikipedians; (which is important).

Aaron Jethro 00:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

This category was renamed/merged with Category:LGBT Wikipedians per this CFD discussion. LGBT covers all of these topics. «»Who?¿?meta 01:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

CFD stuff, for Kbdank71, Splash, Rick Block, and bored admins

Hey, again, no power or net. I'm on generator and dialup. I know I said it before, but ya'll may have to close CFD discussios for like a week. I see it's backed up now, and I can't stay on for very long, even if I could, closing on dialup is a bitch :) I'm fine, animals are fine, my motorcyle is fine, but living in my RV because my side of town is squished. Be back soon. Cheers. «»Who?¿?meta 15:29, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Ever think of moving to a less Hurricane-prone area? Just a suggestion, but New Jersey doesn't get that many, and by the time they get here it's only rain. No? Nice riding...? Ok, well, I tried.  ;) I've closed all of the 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, and some of the 19th. I've started on the actual empties/moves, but I'm not going to bust my ass, seeing as everyone and their brother has a bot that can do it. I'll keep on it as best as I can until someone says you're back. Good luck with the recovery. --Kbdank71 20:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
8-) Unless it's to get another boat and live on the water again, I'll probably only move further south. Because of my illness, I need the warm weather, plus Ft Lauderdale/Miami has soooo many things to do, I have a very wide scope of things I enjoy doing. Besides, I really dont mind hurricanes, been through dozens, just the mobile home park I am currently in, is more of a natural area and not very high on priority lists to get done. Granted 98% of South Florida lost power. I am working on getting a house or a condo, just hard because there are so many stupid rules, no dogs, no cats, no motorcyles, blah blah.. I need to get another boat and move to the Keys, miss living on the water. Well, sorry there has been a lot of CFD stuff to catch up on, I tried to run my bot, but am getting some strange errors. I am not sure if I messed up my code, which I have been checking, or if its server errors. I'm using the neighbors wireless right now, since my sister has power here. I'm still living in my RV at a friends plaza parking lot, mainly for my animals. If I can get my bot working, I will try to get some of the entries done, can't be on that long to do them manually. Thanks again everyone. «»Who?¿?meta 18:19, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Hey, fixed Whobot. Gonna run him on the ones in CFD to clean them up. «»Who?¿?meta 19:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Dear god in heaven, thank you.  :) --Kbdank71 20:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Yea, sorry it took so long. Still using sister's neighbors wireless. Man that list is long. It took me a half hour just to make a list for the bot to run for some of the "Sports by country" subcats. These are going to take awhile, mainly because I have to look up the correct name of every country. I wrote a program to make the listing for me after I have the correct names in though. «»Who?¿?meta 21:06, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
I almost tore my hair out when I saw that list. I mean, it's a good thing, but damn, that's a lot of work. I tried to do it by hand, and almost made it through the A's, when my eyes started to bleed, and I figured I'd be safer if I just went away for awhile. --Kbdank71 21:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Sorry about that. If you'd let me know, I probably could have gotten the list together semi-automatically. This one was sort of an experiment to see both how the community might react to a mega-rename as well as how well we're set up for mega-renaming. I don't have any more up my sleeve, but I think there are folks who favor renaming ALL the Category:Nationalities by occupation (direct and indirect subcats, I think this is literally thousands of categories) to "... from country" format. If "Sports by country" is a headache, this would be at least 10 times worse. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and BTW, I would be doing more to help but I'm in the middle of a crunch at work which will continue for the next week or two (pesky real world). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
That's cool, it wouldn't be so bad if I had power and net. I am only 1/3 the way done with "sports by country" I still have to make a list for the next run, and I'm not doing sort keys right now either. If you feel like it, or have time, you can make a list :) Not sure if I will be back on tommorow or not to do more, but they can wait. You can always check User:Whobot/tasks for the ones I'm working on or have done. «»Who?¿?meta 02:48, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
I'll work on the list. Just let me know what I need to do. Also, I've been fixing the sort keys on the ones already done. --Kbdank71 16:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Cool thanks, yea seen them on whobot/tasks. Sorry didn't get back to ya sooner, but I see you figured out how i was doing it. Have it running now. My trailer is still trashed, no pwr, water pouring out the bottom, so busted pipes, won't be moving back in there anytime soon. Have to go out and look around some more. «»Who?¿?meta 20:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Shit, that sucks to hear about your trailer. Insurance cover any of it? I'm going to start working on the other subcats, probably starting with Ice Hockey by country. --Kbdank71 20:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Star Trek category

Hate to tell you this, but you're adding articles to a category with a big typo in it. :( Category:Stark Trek: The Original Series characters Sorry. Gamaliel 17:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

  • DAMN IT ALL TO HELL. Sigh. Excuse me while I go bang my head against a wall for a few hours. For the record, I didn't type it out, I just clicked on a link, and didn't check the spelling. Thanks for the heads up, I'll go fix it. --Kbdank71 18:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
yea sorry about that, I couldn't remember all the damned names of the shows, so I just put "expand the show name" hoping someone would make good links. «»Who?¿?meta 18:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Category: New Zealand sport

I just move renamed some of the articles to the sport in which they were intended, eg, New Zealand horseracing. Should be OK now. Wallie 13:16, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Is it me, or did you not understand this message? :) «»Who?¿?meta 03:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I understood it. Wallie asked not to delete New Zealand Sport (on the talk page), and that several of the articles were moved elsewhere. I told him(?) that the cat was being moved to Sport in New Zealand and if he(?) wanted to put the moved articles there, to feel free. --Kbdank71 14:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Genau. Wallie 19:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

20k

20,000 edits, yay me ;) «»Who?¿?meta 05:11, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Congratulations! If I could figure out how to give you a nice picture of a kitty, I would.  :) --Kbdank71 14:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


RE: Category renaming: Please see Category talk:Commodity exchanges. Thank you. - Ted Wilkes 16:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Heh. You ever see this template before.. Template:Cfr-speedy, just found it on Category:U.S. Virgin Islands. I kinda like it, added it to CFD how-to and "deletion tools template". «»Who?¿?meta 02:58, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure you knew, but my "special song" was meant as a joke :) Anyway, i'm going to protect whobot/tasks, I just thought about if someone (vandal or mis-informed user) added something to it w/o me double checking it. But feel free to continue to add to it. «»Who?¿?meta 15:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I knew. It was a good one, thanks. Don't know if you already have or not, but you might want to put whobot/tasks on your watch list. Also, for the template, no, haven't seen it before now. It's a good idea. I fixed the cat it was in from cfd to cfr. --Kbdank71 15:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Yea all my subpages are on my watchlist, but with my intermittent net acs, I was afraid I might miss the last addition, better safe than sorry. Yea, I didn't even realize or remember we had a cfr cat. «»Who?¿?meta 15:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Is there any way to put in a sort key when setting up the tasks, or is that a manual process? --Kbdank71 16:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Hey, sorry, been offline, well mostly in bed from pain, another story. Anyway. Uhm, yea there is, 2 ways to do it, and one of them won't check to see if there is already a sort key and will fuck up any existing one. I dont know how to do the other one, but could try to figure it out. Also I see that you added the "remove x from cat" I guess you went digging thru the code to get the right one :) If you want, you can leave the sortkeys as they are for now and i will try to make a list to fix them all. «»Who?¿?meta 01:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Oh yea, if you just need an entire cat depopulated, you can just use "DEPOPULATE_CAT Category CFD_Listing_day". «»Who?¿?meta 18:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Ok, this "vacation" is really starting to suck :) Having Wiki-withdraw again. «»Who?¿?meta 00:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday!

Here's a tasty Birthday cake. Best wishes to you! Hope you enjoy your day. Now, get on out there and have some fun! ;)

--Jen Moakler 14:06, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kbdank71 14:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, then. Happy birthday! Try not to attract too many trolls today, or they'll think we feed them cake. -Splashtalk 14:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I think you could appreciate my special birthday song:

<strong melodramatic voice>

Happy birthday
happy birthday.
Misery grief and despair
people dying everywhere
but happy birthday.

</strong melodramtic voice>

Bapphy Hirthday too. :) <-- that's not a typo «»Who?¿?meta 14:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Submarines

I'm concerned with the recent renaming to category:submarines of China. Since submarines are almost always state-owned, and its relatively short history, there's little need to have a category generally for China. IMO it's better to classify the submarines with a category each for the PRC and the ROC, in line with naming conventions (categories) and naming conventions (Chinese). — Instantnood 19:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Personally, I'd keep category:submarines of China as a supercategory, and move it's contents to a PRC submarines cat. Then I'd create an ROC Submarines category, populate it, and put both the PRC and the ROC Submarine cats in sumbarines of China. But, since there is only one category and one article currently in submarines of china, I'd also be perfectly fine leaving them where they are. Because technically, they are submarines of china. Then again, I'm not an expert on china. --Kbdank71 21:12, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. Unlike ships I don't think a general category would be necessary for submarines. Do you think I can speedy rename it as per naming conventions (categories), or should I make a normal nomination? — Instantnood 09:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't know that it would fall under the speedy rules, and there are a few people that get a little ticked off when anything gets speedied. A normal cfd should be ok. --Kbdank71 16:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Alright. Will do so after the navy ship categories are passed. — Instantnood 07:53, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Blue screen of death/Red screen of death

Hello. The merge of articles is disputed. I much appreciate your opnion, thanks. --Mateusc 02:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Um, ok. I don't recall having an opinion on any such merge, but you're welcome. Are you sure you are on the right talk page? --Kbdank71 14:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Government

Hello again. This was not a nomination to merge, but a nomination to rename the former as the latter. The latter was created by myself so as to restructure as per the opinion in the nomination. No renaming (or merging) is now necessary. — Instantnood 19:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I know it was to rename, not merge, but at the time the second cat didn't exist. Since it now does, it's a merge. The only difference between a rename and merge is whether or not the second cat needs to be created. Regardless of what it's called, that's what the consensus was. --Kbdank71 19:24, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Restructuring was done in response to their comments.. The whole thing was restructured after everyone has cast their vote, and apparently the consensus was based on what the situation was like before that. If we're going to move all the things to the second category it's going to mess everything up. That's not what the consensus was. — Instantnood 20:02, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
No it wasn't. There wasn't one person who agreed with your restructuring proposal. The consensus was indeed to move everything from Hong Kong Government to Government of Hong Kong. You were the only one against it. --Kbdank71 20:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
"Hong Kong Government" (capital letter "g") is the executive organ, and "government of Hong Kong" (small letter "g") includes topics on the government aspects of Hong Kong, which include executive, legislative and judiciary. Even if the so-called consensus were followed and all the things were moved to category:government of Hong Kong, they would have to be subcategorised according to the three branches anyway. — Instantnood 20:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Alright, as I have said, if it is going to be merged as per the "consensus", the items still have to be regrouped into subcategories according to the three branches. It would be a waste of time and efforts. — Instantnood 03:03, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Category:Environment

"The discussion at cfd has ended. You seem to be more knowledgeable about which articles need to be separated out. Could you take care of this when you are able? Thanks. --Kbdank71 16:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)"

I have sorted the Category:Environment and Category:Environmentalism. Cast your eye over for any I have overlooked. Some of the articles need renaming to correcctly categorise them. Alan Liefting 01:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Philwelch's RfA

Thanks for voting to support on my successful RfA! — Phil Welch 03:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Category:Executed revolutionaries

Hi, I was surprised this was not merged, there were 4 supporters for this merge, against 2 against, one user asked for it to be listified but obviously they did not mean for all the people not to be included in their original categories Category:Revolutionaries and Category:Executed people i.e. merged. Please can you reconsider labelling this debate Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_November_2#Category:Executed_revolutionaries_to_Category:Revolutionaries no consensus as I feel this is not accurate. Thanks Arniep 15:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I only counted 3 for: You, Valiantis, and siafu. 2 against: Monkbel and Instantnood. 1 listify. Did I miss something? --Kbdank71 15:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I think the problem is even if someone does not say merge, one can argue that that was indeed the intention. The person who requested it be listified meant that a list be made for Executed revolutionaries and the Category:Executed revolutionaries be deleted. I am sure they did not mean as a result of that that the people in the category would not be returned to their original categories of Category:Revolutionaries and Category:Executed people i.e. merged with these categories. There is exactly the same problem with Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_November_2#Category:Jewish_American_actors. There were 8 votes to merge, 2 to delete, and 5 to keep. Again, I am sure the the delete votes meant this category be deleted, they did not mean that the people in the category should not be returned to Category:American actors and Category:Jewish Americans, so in effect there was a 2/3 majority in favour of deletion. I would really ask you to look again at these cases as I worked very hard in trying to build a consensus. Arniep 19:42, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I think you are making assumptions when you shouldn't. If someone does not say merge, and I say, "Well, that must have been his intention", I'll have that person here arguing that I made a bad decision. It's really not that hard to type the word "Merge". If they didn't take that simple step, I will only assume that he meant not to merge. Same thing with the Jewish American actors cat. I cannot and will not assume anything. A delete vote means delete. A merge vote means merge. If I need to, I will take the discussion as a whole into account. In both of these cases, I determined that there was no consensus. This does not mean that in a week or so, they cannot be renominated. --Kbdank71 22:50, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
The first voters did not say that the Revolutionaries or Executed people categories should be deleted, and the second voters did not say that the American actors or Jewish American categories should be deleted. Therefore, it is logical that they wished these people to be returned back to these original categories even if they did not state that. Arniep 00:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Renaming categories

Replied here. Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate that. --Blackcap | talk 18:00, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

CFD Japanese military aircraft

I marked all categories that I want to see deleted with {{cfdu|All subcategories of Category:Japanese military aircraft}}. Also, I answered on my talk page -- Mkill 18:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Responded here. --Kbdank71 19:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Me and CFD

hey, since I still don't have a home boohoo :) and am on very limited, I'm just gonna spend time rv'n vandalism and running Whobot when needed. I have two realtors looking for a condo for me to buy and FEMA should be getting me a travel trailer to live in for a short period. Sorry I dumped CFD on ya again, I know you were kind of tired of it. At least while I'm at my sis's house I can do a little good on Wiki. «»Who?¿?meta 23:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, stop. I don't mind, and you've got bigger things to worry about than CfD. I'll agree it was nice to have a break from it for awhile, I find that I do enjoy doing it. So take your time getting back. --Kbdank71 03:15, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Category:People convicted of drunk driving

Several of the comments in the discussion of this CfD said that it should be listified. That appears not to have been done, however. Is there a way to create the list at this point? It may be that some of the people who were in the category didn't belong there, and don't belong on the list, so the population of the category before the CfD listing couldn't be taken as carved in stone. Nevertheless, in the compilation of the list, knowing the articles formerly so categorized would be a useful starting point. It would be much better than having to begin again as if none of the prior work had ever been done. JamesMLane 07:12, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

A list could certainly be compiled, but the same problem exists as the category. Who to include and citing sources. Simply copying the category contents isn't enough. Unfortunately, I don't know who or what bot took care of the emptying. If that is available, you could check the User Contributions of that user to find the people that were moved out of the category. --Kbdank71 16:55, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

More "support group" lists

Hi Kbdank71: Through some great misfortune, perhaps bad karma in a past life, you somehow have become my "go to admin" for a particular type of issue :-). After I picked you more-or-less at random from the admin list, you did such an exemplary job of intervening over at the List of born-again Christian laypeople.

So now I've found myself working on another list with almost exactly the same issues, and almost exactly the same personalities (different editors, same behaviors): List of Jewish jurists. Again the story is that some editors just want to get "as many names as possible" onto the list; they identify with the adjective, and like seeing people "like themselves" on a list, especially people who are "good" and "accomplished". Just substitute "Jewish" for "born-again Christian" in this instance. The result, of course, is that the editors who just want to increase the number of listed individuals scoff at a request/demand for evidence, or turn to "just trust me", or "I have a friend who...".

There are a few wrinkles to this issue. I first noticed the page when it was on AfD. Some anon had AfD'd every single "Jewish Fooers" list, which is unrelated to my current concern. Those AfD's are basically all getting voted the right ways, and will be closed soon enough. Having voted "keep", I then wanted to go over an improve the evidentiary standards for the list. And then the various oppositions, generally from User:RachelBrown and User:Poetlister.

Aside from the unfortunately expected edit conflict on the list itself, those editors did a few other rather cynical or disruptive things. Poetlister went and vandalized the similar page I had just created, List of African American jurists by deleting a name (Johnnie Cochran). Obviously, I created the AA jurists list in large part inspired by the existing Jewish one. And RachelBrown created the spurious List of Jewish lawyers, copying over all her preferred content from a version of the existing list, with who knows what in mind exactly.

I'm not sure what the best way through the whole thicket is. As before, I just want the names listed to be accompanied by evidence of list membership (being Jewish in this case, born-again in the prior one; actually one Jewish non-jurist had been on the list too). Probably just a stern word from an admin who endorsed WP:V would help quite a bit. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 04:02, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Be happy to help out, but I'm wary of doing anything while the AFD is in progress. Let me know when it completes and I'll see what I can do. --Kbdank71 20:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Whobot

Hey, sorry I missed the entries you added yesterday on Whobot tasks. Have been apartment searching like CrAzy. Put a deposit down on one today, now I have to wait for approval. I been checking to see if you added anything lately, of course the one day I don't check you add soemthing :) But I see someone got them done, I'm guessing you or Bluebot. Hopefully sometime really really soon, I will be living in a structure and be able to get back on. ttyl. «»Who?¿?meta 21:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Never you worry. I think bluebot got them. Funny, today there were three of us cleaning up the list. I kept stepping on toes. Seems like it's one extreme or the other, I guess. Good luck with the abode. --Kbdank71 21:44, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


Deleting frivolous Jewish categories

Hello Kbdank: Kindly take a look at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 25#Sub-Categories of Jewish people. This area needs some cut-backs again. IZAK 03:25, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Jewish categories

I would be grateful if you could reconsider your vote on these as the previous vote was only on categories which link Jewishness by country not by occupation. The vote did not deal with any categories such as Jewish philosophers or Jewish classical musicians, therefore to claim there was a consensus to delete these previously is misleading. I really do not see how these two categories are at all frivolous. However, I do agree that Category:Jewish baseball players is too specific, and Category:Jewish American actors is unworkable as people may identify as Jewish as well as quite a few other ethnicities so could end up in multiple variations of these nationality-ethnicity-occupation categories. Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Sub-Categories_of_Jewish_people Regards Arniep 15:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

CFD rename

HI - I'm considering closing the SBC category rename (from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 18) as "rename to category:AT&T" (rather than rename as requested to category:AT&T Corporation or the suggested category:AT&T, Inc). The new company will be officially named "AT&T Inc." (no comma, with a period), but I strongly suspect will be universally known as "AT&T". Does this sound legit to you (rename, but to a name not even suggested in the CFD discussion)? Please let me know what you think. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I think that's a good idea. It makes sense. And if other people have a problem with it (which I don't think they will), we can easily change it again. --Kbdank71 14:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:21

  • I think that's a great idea. Excellent article. Anything I can do to help? --Kbdank71 15:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

glitch? crack? what?

Ok, if you go here, you'll notice that in the games list, Dead or Alive 4 is uncapitalized! (Gasp!) but then when i tried to capitalize it, it didn't work! in the source, it's capitalized! what's going on!? --daunrealist 23:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't know what happened between your post and now, but it appears to be capitalized now. I can't even guess why something like that would happen. --Kbdank71 14:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Reply

Nope, I use the pywikibot, so I can't change what it does, I do manually remove the tag afterwards when I have finished a long run of them though. Also, I am actually buiding a brand new bot of my own at the moment, so that is something that I will remember to make it do. thanks Martin 15:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Mathematical model

Why did you list Category:Mathematical model for deletion? Thanks,--Carl Hewitt 21:52, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Due to the discussion held at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 26, I determined there was a consensus to delete the category. --Kbdank71 03:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
It seems to me that Category:Mathematical model and its associated article Mathematical model are well established in the published literature. Category:Mathematical model serves a useful purpose in categorizing the articles that are already there. Won't you just have to bring back the category later if you delete it? Regards, --Carl Hewitt 04:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I have proposed the re-creation of Category:Mathematical model. Please discuss in Talk:Mathematical model. Thanks,--Carl Hewitt 19:11, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I have no opinion on the matter. --Kbdank71 19:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
But are you not the administrator who is responsible for deleting Category:Mathematical model?--Carl Hewitt 19:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes. I read the discussion from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 26, determined there was a consensus to delete, and deleted it. I don't need to form an opinion on the subject before closing the discussion. Sometimes I do, at what point I'll add my opinion to the discussion. Not always, though. --Kbdank71 19:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

CFD gamed?

Hi - I noticed a message like this on a user page, which leads me to believe the CFD vote on Category:Pro-life politicians was, let's say, not natural. Given the small number of people voting at CFD, actively drumming up votes based on Category:Pro-Life Wikipedians membership has a very bad smell about it. Any ideas what can/should be done about this? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:50, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

It's a shame that people aren't being neutral about this. Too many people let their own personal beliefs enter into their decisions instead of just doing what is best for the encyclopedia. That said, the only things I can think of to do would be along the lines of a "Categorization committee", that would have decision-making power over what to do with categories. That would solve a whole host of problems we're currently having, not just this one. I don't think that would fly unless handed down by Jimbo, a la Arbcom.
As for what to do about this particular problem, I don't think there is much we can do. There are no rules stating people can't drum up support to keep or delete a certain category that is near to their heart. I do know the LGBT community keeps tabs on CfD and will alert people to come and vote to keep on certain categories. Again, unless something much bigger happens, we may just have to live with it.  :( --Kbdank71 14:44, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
In this case, I'm tempted to relist the category and solicit broader input, specifically mentioning that the previous outcome may have been unduly influenced by votes solicited from a community of like-minded editors. I personally find organized POV-pushers worse than vandals. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I thought of that too, but I didn't think we'd get enough support to form a consensus. Can't hurt to try, I suppose. --Kbdank71 16:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Irish-Italian-Americans

When you remove people from the category, add them to the Irish-Americans and Italian-Americans category. 68.77.139.51 18:14, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Did you not see this message? 68.77.139.51 18:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


rm deleted cat?

what did you mean by that? I dont think the category had been created in the first place yet. →AzaToth 17:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment, I didn't create the categories, I just link to them ,so can the users create them by them self →AzaToth 17:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

(edit conflict)That might be the case. I assumed that someone who would take the time to create a template and put it in a category would also go ahead and create the category. If it hasn't been created yet, then it only makes sense to remove the "category" from the template, as it creates a redlink. --Kbdank71 17:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Everything takes time, but I revert the remove and creates the categories then now →AzaToth 17:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
What? --Kbdank71 17:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, Have fixed it now →AzaToth 18:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/b/d/User_talk%7EKbdank71_Archive4_1e88.html"