User:Rich Farmbrough/Talk Archive 4
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] How do get rights to delete and undelete pages and stuff?
Is there a class you must take, or no? Antares33712 22:26, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Richard Vanderpool
Rich, please delete the article. It's a proven hoax (on the VfD talk page, you see all the information necessary to prove it was a hoax. I was in the speedy list, and seen it, and pulled it, thinking it was a valid article about an unfamous minor league baseball player. So I figured keep, even if for historical posterity. But seeing as it was a hoax, I feel VERY bad about pulling from the speedy. IF I adn't have done that, we would be wasting time on it.
Antares33712 22:38, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Balky deletes
Like 2 out of 3 times (or more) clicking 'confirm' gives "Error. Sorry- we have a problem... The wikimedia web server didn't return any response to your request."? Oh, yeah. Rather tiresome. I haven't been deleting much recently so I don't have a good feel for if it only started after the outage earlier today, or not. Niteowlneils 22:41, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: What to List on speedy deletion
Ok, fine, I'll cede. But my article on Nichole Arsenault was speedy-ed away from me, with no chance of a repost, yet this hoax is dragging on.
Antares33712 22:53, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
By that I mean, if that could be speedy-ed away, and the second editor nominated it for a speedy, and everything afterwards was vandalism, or adding more to the hoax, it should just be speedy-ed :-) Antares33712 22:55, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] True, it was on VfU
But the VfU got due process. I may not agree, but it got due process. I feel the speedy was out of process, because a) I didn't repost the content, b) I agrued its merits when it had the explain-significance flag, and promsed to research and add and c) I wasn't a part of the original VfD vote (if I would have been there, I would have voted keep. I read on a wikipedia page were that can be useful in establishing due process. So for that reason, I feel the delete without due-process. But on that, I'm starting to get tired of sounding like a sour grape. :-) Antares33712 23:20, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] True, I probably did put it first. I forgot
I forgot. Can you add those edits under my name to my count. But on the due process you see my point. If I get the information and try to repost (under Wikipedia guidelines since the article was a stub), I don't want to be labeled a vandal. Antares33712 23:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
PS: Can you email me the page. I was proud of the IPA pronounciation thing I did (lord, now I'm so vane :-) ) Antares33712 23:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Wow, thanks! I wasn't excepting that. I can work on making the article more notable. Antares33712 13:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Ah, ok....thanks! Antares33712 15:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] Vandalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SARS_coronavirus&diff=prev&oldid=11803311
[edit] Disambiguation scripts
I'm not sure what perl does with pipe characters (|), but I've made a little change to one of your scripts. Oh, and to fulfil one of my many pet peeves: When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.
When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Alphax τεχ 11:04, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Histogenesis
Hi, I have no idea why histogenesis was deleted. Danny 03:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hi, it was probably like you said. If it was blank, I would have deleted it during an effort to get rid of speedy deletes. Sorry for any confusion. Danny 17:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion at Talk:Pakistan
Would you like to join the animated discussion on the Pakistan's talk page? The current issue is whether "Pakistan is famous for its support of Taliban and 9/11 terrorist" is a suitable sentence to start the article's first paragraph. Your contribution would be much appreciated, as the current discussion seems to be more of a dialog between Ragib and SamTr014 Talk:Pakistan. Thanks !--PrinceA 06:39, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Benazir Bhutto
R you interested in to join the discussion of cleaning up the article of Benazir Bhutto? Talk:Benazir Bhutto--Raju1 03:16, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Fathers' rights
Hi Rich, I noticed your changes to the dates on the Fathers' rights page. Perhaps you could explain how formatted dates improve the page? They add links to particular dates, eg. today is 24 June 2005 but are these links relevant or useful if no entry appears on the date pages to the 'event' from which they were linked? It seems like you are keen on date cleanup, I am just curious as to the purpose and rationale for this project. Any details cheerfully received. -Akiva Quinn 00:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Bot? - No bot
Are you running a bot to do disambiguation? You're missing an awful lot of edit summaries. Alphax τεχ 10:45, 24 June 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Date wikification bot? No bot
Are you running a bot to wikify dates? If so, you should fix your code to avoid false positives like [1] where you changed
- on 5 September 665,000 Soviet prisoners were taken
to
- on [[5 September]], [[665]],000 Soviet prisoners were taken
If you are running a bot, you need to follow the rules on Wikipedia:Bots, you need to run your bot under a separate account from your ordinary account, and you should announce your bot at Wikipedia talk:Bots to give other editors a chance to comment. Gdr 2005-06-30 19:46:41 (UTC)
- No I'm not running a bot. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)
I also came across two different articles, where you changed the date format inappropriately (Vladimír Špidla and Calculating_the_day_of_the_week). I would advise you to fix the wikify bot to precede such errors and confusion.
- No I'm not running a bot. See my user page. Thanks for fixing the articles, prticularly day of week one which was an egregious oversight on my part. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)
[edit] Wikify Dates
Please see my user page. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:2005 London...
I'm done, but I'll be keeping an eye on it. --Merovingian (t) (c) July 7, 2005 11:12 (UTC)
- what's this with the 'gone in 60 seconds' note in the london bombings talk page? Adidas 00:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ought to VfD but too lazy
Vaso Vukotic's Theory
[edit] Revert your own edits...
You're the first strange person who'll write "revert my own edits" on the edit summary column XDDD. Deryck C. 12:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Disambiguation scripts
Hello Rich, I noticed you generate the disambiguation link list and wanted to see if you would like to offload this duty. I have recently written wpfsck in Perl. It currently processes three cleanup projects while only requiring one scan over the cur and links dumps. Adding this to the existing cleanup projects would be simple and I am further developing a framework to automatically update and publish cleanup projects. As such this would become just another task it performs, but it would free you from the obligation. Regardless I have also created a Perl module you may find useful. It uses a callback system to facilitate processing of the dump files; the subroutine invoked gets a hash that is nearly identical to a $sth->fetchrow_hashref (if you know what that means, if not, it is very simple) and an optional second subroutine can be specified. This subroutine receives an identically structured hash but there are a few restrictions: the article text is read only and it is not safe to use regular expressions. The tradeoff is that memory copy operations can be avoided for articles you are not interested in and a significant performance boost. I also wrote a report generator that takes a list of articles and produces nicely formated cleanup projects. See this as an example. If you would like to use this code you are more than welcome. Lastly (whew, this is long winded), I have recently created the WikiProject help desk; in short its geeks taking requests for one off jobs that computers can do or helping people who use tools that have broken and they themselves don't know how to fix it. Right now there is little demand but I suspect that will change when word gets out. Are you interested? Thanks for the ear, Triddle 07:12, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Aircraft specification survey
Since you are a contributor to aircraft articles, you may be interested in a survey currently underway to help develop a revised version of our standard specifications section. Bobblewik 19:36, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 1000000000000000000
I do not think it was a good idea to move 1000000000000000000 to 1000000000000000000 (number). If you noticed, the article is being voted for deletion, so it is best to keep it in place while the vote takes place.
Second, by moving it, you made the link to the votes for deletion page invalid (well I did a redirect, but that does not change my point).
Can you move the article back please? Oleg Alexandrov 20:18, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Oleg.
- I have closed the VfD (which has been running a long time), making 1000000000000000000 a redirect to 11th millennium and beyond. I have moved the content to 1000000000000000000 (number) where it belongs. I have put small note at the top of 11th millennium and beyond for anyone who gets redirected having entered 1000000000000000000 (or any other large number), and meant the number not the year. If you want to have 1000000000000000000 (number) deleted, then a seperate VfD could be used. Rich Farmbrough 20:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- I see. I was confused by the fact that the article was moved but the vfd notice was not removed (I mean, almost half of the day passed between the two).
-
- About the new article 1000000000000000000 (number). I think this has no chance of developing into an encyclopedic article, so I do plan to vote it for deletion. Let us see how it goes. Oleg Alexandrov 21:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- You may well be right. Sorry I left the VfD notice in by mistake. Rich Farmbrough 21:08, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
-
Why did you close the VFD on 1000000000000000000 with redirect? The tally for the VFD was 5 or 6 for redirect (to different articles), 13 for delete. Are you ignoring the results of VFD? --A D Monroe III 00:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
- Would deletion and recreation as a redirect pacify you? — David Remahl 01:00, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- I've put my thoughts on the 1000000000000000000 (number) VfD page. Rich Farmbrough 01:32, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I read your comments. To summarize, you looked over the VFD results, disagreed with them (for reasons you stated), redirected the page, and then closed the VFD with the text "The result of the debate was move and replace with redirect" when you knew the result of the debate was to delete. Is this right? --A D Monroe III 02:03, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] African COTW
[edit] VfD closure
Hi there. Per my comment in the VfD on the page you moved to, I'm wondering how you reached a "redirect" decision on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/1000000000000000000. I count 15d, 5r which is a consensus to delete (imo). Note that Jarlaxle Artemis has sort-of voted twice. -Splash 23:00, 31 July 2005 (UTC)