User talk:Kevinkor2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] User:Kevinkor2/Research into names of Wikipedia articles
That's pretty cool! Very interesting to see, thanks. -- Natalya 13:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
You are welcome, Natalya. It was my pleasure. --01:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)Kevinkor2
[edit] Towers of London
I told 12thMarquis:
I suggest if you you want "despite being a spoof punk band" to stick on the page:
- Find a newspaper or magazine article that uses the words, "spoof punk band", directly when describing Towers of London.
- Quote the sentence from the article and cite it.
- Add the quote to another section (possibly "History") rather than the lead paragraph.
What do you think of this advice? --Kevinkor2 13:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- The guy was just trolling, its a genuine band.. its article seems to recieve quite a bit of vandalism recently because the front man has been featuring on television shows. - Deathrocker 14:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- From WP:TROLL#Bad faith, "When you try to decide if someone is a troll, strive to assume they are not. Explain errors politely and reasonably; point them towards policies, the manual of style and relevant past discussions. Don't conclude they are a troll until they have shown complete inability or unwillingness to listen to reason or to moderate their position based upon the input of others. ... Remember and apply the principles laid out at Wikipedia:Don't bite the newcomers."
- Therefore, even if 12thMarquis has been trolling (an assumption that I do not make), they can still make valuable contributions.
- I am willing to help. --Kevinkor2 14:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Internal Links inside External Links
When an [[internal link]] is the only content inside an [http: external link], the result is probably not what the editor wants.
I propose changing an [http: external link [[internal link]]] combination to [[internal link]][http: external link].
User:Kevinkor2/Pages that use internal links inside external links has a list of pages with this problem.--Kevinkor2 00:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] SmackBot
To: Rich Farmbrough, Kenosis
From: Kevinkor2
Currently, Rich, your bot is expanding {{fact}} by adding the current month, resulting in {{Fact|date=February 2007}}.
Kenosis, whenever you see this on the Truth, Pragmatism, and a few other articles, you revert it. As you noted at User talk:Rich Farmbrough#Automated fact-tag tagging, it would be useful to have fact dating/nondating under control of an article's editors.
I suggest we adopt one of three possible compromises:
- Manually change {{fact}} to {{fact|date=}} for facts where we do not know an accurate date.
- Add {{nobots}} to the top of the article.
- Research the page history for the first appearance of the {{fact}} tag to give it the correct date.
I recommmend the first alternative. --Kevinkor2 17:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Agreed in general, Kevinkor2. The existence of the category Category:Articles with unsourced statements, out of which this function of the bot arises, is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 February 20. I'm on the road right now and only have a minute. Talk later. ... Kenosis 20:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hi Kevin, Good set of ideas, but actually all the articles are done now (with a vanishing small set of exceptions, sich as those where people have substed the template, or reverts of SmackBot). If anyone wants to move the dates further back, they can of course do so,
Kenosisand others claim that it is easy to find the dates from history - I think "easy" is a relative term here. The names of the dated categories are supposed to reflect that the tags are at least that old (since month boundaries, for example, will never be neat), however the rate of addition of articles suggests that a typical "current month" will be around 20,000 at the end, so that the February block is not as oversized as it appears. Rich Farmbrough, 00:23 24 February 2007 (GMT). 00:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Kevin, Good set of ideas, but actually all the articles are done now (with a vanishing small set of exceptions, sich as those where people have substed the template, or reverts of SmackBot). If anyone wants to move the dates further back, they can of course do so,
[edit] Thank you!
How very kind of you to offer your encouragement and appreciation, especially after all I've been through lately. I finally had a few chuncks of time to do some serious additions. I really do enjoy writing articles. And I have been blessed to aquire very good sources to use. Thanks again for your kindness! Pastorwayne 13:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Truth cites
I've reverted to reintroduce the two older statements with "citatioon-needed' templates, and will now remove the tags instead to avoid recurrences of this kind of mindless editing until "WP fact-tag policy" can be sorted out by the wider community. Sorry to inadvertently step on your "cite-def" edit. Please feel free to re-do when you have a chance. Good regards. ... Kenosis 14:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ISSN template
Yes, thank you - it is functioning the way it was before! I still cannot say I understand how it all works though ... :-( ... Feels like I need to see what is calling this particular template before I have that Ah Ha!, but I haven't figured out how to do that. Also, in the current code, the parameter bolded below never displays, right? Keesiewonder talk 12:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" |This article refers to a periodical that doesn't have its [[ISSN]] information listed. If you can, please provide it. {{#if:{{NAMESPACE}}|[[Category:ISSN needed]]|This Template should be used only on Talk pages}} |}
- The only improvement I can envision is that the template discontinues listing itself and excludes Wikipedia:Template messages/Maintenance when you view [1]. Keesiewonder talk 12:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Movedetail
Template:Movedetail has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kevinkor2 08:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- As you may notice, I do still differ with you about the usefulness of {{movedetail}}, but I appreciate your courtesy about the matter, especially taking the time to notify me of the proposed deletion. Thank you. -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- You are welcome, Antaeus.
- {{movedetail}} is well written, and its function of moving detail (instead of an entire page or section) is something that is not covered by the existing templates.
- I suggest we could rename this template to {{mergeto-detail}}. It could function the same as the current {{mergeto}}, but have an additional detail= parameter.
- What do you think? --Kevinkor2 11:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. I wish it would be possible to tell how a template (or category) has been used historically. --Kevinkor2 11:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DEFAULTSORT
Thanks for your msg; you may be interested in my reply at User talk:BrownHairedGirl#DEFAULTSORT. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Billy Graham
Thanks! I thought that I had got them all. Thanks again! --Wikihermit 21:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hi, and thanks for the visit!
Hi, Kevin! Thanks for the visit to my user talk page, and for leaving it better than you found it! Have a great day! — Jeff G. 22:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] lightning
Thats the problem! I have no clue! What they did just pissed me off! not what that typed, well that to, but how STUPID it was that it made 0 since! by the way, yes i have but....i forgot everything in it!X X--Takaomi I. Shimoi 12:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re:3RR on Wiki
User:Ant.silver was vandalizing Wiki by systematically blanking sections. He was subsequently indefinitely blocked for his disruptive edits. It was not a content dispute, and it can't continue due to his block. Leebo T/C 01:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- I apologize, Leebo. You are correct. --Kevinkor2 01:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] .hack/wiki
You know what?! Your right! 100% right! and as for my text typeing from yestrday, i have no clue why i typed like that! I guess i was to into the moment! Hopefully that moment! And ill try to find out who did the vandaling on lightning!Kanpai!--Takaomi I. Shimoi 16:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] BAN HIM!
I found the #$% who did that STUPIT thing this %&$ was the last and olny person who edited on that page! HE IS:USER:Bert Hickman Im going to tell him something he wont like! K.A.N.P.A.I.!--Takaomi I. Shimoi 16:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I am 50% certian! His page and history does look fine but, he was the last and first editer in that time span!--Takaomi I. Shimoi 16:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Well he was the first and last one to be on there to edit! between the time i did it to the time i returned "HE" was the "OLNY" person to be on that area!--Takaomi I. Shimoi 16:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I put alot of info on that DAMN Bubble! I typed,in my own words ,the police & witness report! I come back to find that B.S. on there! is i6t possible that a vandal can put that stuff there and NOT be in the history??? --Takaomi I. Shimoi 16:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Not likely.
- Sometimes when editing a page, I have trouble with the browser's "Back" button. Consider the following scenario:
- Add a new section to a talk page by clicking "+" at the top of the page.
- Type a few words in the moment.
- Click the "Show preview" button.
- Do lots and lots of typing.
- Click the "Show preview" button again.
- See that everything is satisfactory, so click the browser's "Back" button.
- Sometimes the browser discards all changes made between the first and second preview! --Kevinkor2 17:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A grain of salt
Kevinkor2, I would take Mr.Taka's exclamations with a grain of salt. His editing style is extremely similar to a blocked user I know who has been creating sock puppets. Now, even if that's just a major coincidence, the problem has been discovered and it turns out that there was no problem in the first place. Mr.Taka should drop it now. Leebo T/C 17:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removed Personally identifiable information
To: Cliffb (talk • contribs) and Dfrg.msc (talk • contribs)
From: Kevinkor2 (talk • contribs)
I've taken the liberty of removing the names and e-mail addresses from your AMA case. The following are the changes I made:
- 08:34, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Cliffb (removed Personally identifiable information) (top)
- 08:28, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Cliffb (→Summary: - removed Personally identifiable information)
- 08:26, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser (→Checkuser Request for AMA case - remove Personally identifiable information.) (top)
You can see the information that was originally there by clicking on the (diff) links above.
--Kevinkor2 08:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've taken the liberty of reverting the edits you made to my AMA case. Attempted harassment should not be done in private, providing the harasser any additional privacy is repugnant. Additionally, the email address used by the harasser is forged, and thus does no good to protect, either from spammers or other wikipedians.
- I am a bit curious why you felt a need to do this in the first place?
- Best Regards. —Cliffb 17:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry about that, Cliff. My initial change was a reaction to seeing a name and e-mail address in a public talk page. Were you able to use the (diff) links I provided to undo my mistake? --Kevinkor2 18:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Positive input
Thank you for your words of encouragement - they help a lot when one spends a large chunk of time dealing with what appears to be the lunatic fringe. Enjoy your day! Paul venter 20:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] regex!
Thanks; I needed (I think) to take off the trailing \b on the find and both the leading and trailing on the replace, but, essentially, you are, of course, right on! Thank you very much! Keesiewonder talk 23:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Still wrapping wrong in FF
Sorry to report that the George Harrison article still wraps improperly. I used the Firefox "Web Developer" extension to set my window to fit on an 800x600 screen and saw a horizontal scroll bar. I scrolled down until I saw this which shows the "citation needed" message spilling over the right-hand window border, and also shows the scroll bar at the bottom. I deleted a little bit of the window, but I think the problem with the {{fact}} template HTML/CSS in Firefox is shown clearly. The screenshot is from Firefox 1.5, but I checked and got the same results from Firefox 2.0. John Cardinal 14:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lady Phillips
To: Berks105 (talk • contribs) and Paul venter (talk • contribs)
From: Kevinkor2 (talk • contribs)
I recommend that both of you stop renaming the article about Dorothea Sarah Florence Alexandra, Lady Phillips.
These actions are interfering with your common goal: To get the best article on Lady Phillips possible.
Until active editting has stopped, treat the name of the article as a placeholder. After active editting has stopped, we can rename it if necessary.
--Kevinkor2 20:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mr.Taka
I just wanted to note that we should ignore his sob story that he posted. Don't reply to him unless he talks about Wikipedia (and even then, only if it's about how he can improve in a sensible way). His signature is dumping a rambling life crisis on his talk page before moving to his next account, so if we acknowledge it he'll just keep talking. Leebo T/C 16:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the warning, Leebo. Because of this, I will provide paraphrase/translation service only on messages about Wikipedia and how he can improve his behavior on it.--Kevinkor2 22:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)