User:Danielfolsom/Archive

[edit] WELCOME!

Welcome!

Hello, Danielfolsom, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Wildnox(talk) 03:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure on the use of html. I know some works, like I use the <br> for break lines and such, but I'm not sure how much of html works with wikiformatting. Also in the future, please edit User talk pages rather than User pages, as it does not notify users if you edit their userpage. --Wildnox(talk) 03:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Most HTML works on Wiki, but some of it is inaccurate or deprecated in xHTML and should technically be avoided. As an example Wikipedia has its own coding for '''bold text''', while HTML uses <b>bold text</b>. But nobody cares that much and both work in nearly all cases, so it's not something you need to worry about overly much. --tjstrf talk 03:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The easiest way to learn how to use Wikipedia is just to edit what you know, copy others who know things you don't, and not be afraid to ask questions for things you still don't understand. At least that's what I did. When I needed to learn Wiki syntax, I just picked an editor who seemed to know what they were doing, looked through their contribution history, and imitated what they did. For template coding, I found a page that used the template I wanted, and copied it. There are probably a couple articles somewhere where I filled a page with out of date html coding, but there are many people willing to fix minor errors like that and as long as it's readable people shouldn't mind too terribly. We have dozens pages of policies and guidelines, but most of them are common sense or simply expand another rule to cover a unique situation. --tjstrf talk 03:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Well you don't "need" anything, but I would suggest not listing your address and cell number. Since you seem to want to know about userboxes(those templates with things like "This user is male" and the like), see WP:USERBOX, near the bottom there is box with links to different lists of userboxes. --Wildnox(talk) 04:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Powerslam magazine

It looks like you did the tagging properly to me. The reason it's not deleted yet is probably just backlog. CAT:CSD is currently at 300-ish candidates, and admins will have to go through all of them individually. This understandably takes a while.

One more thing, could you please sign your talk page comments? This is done by either clicking the button above the edit window (the one with the cursive John Hancock signature on it) or typing --~~~~ --tjstrf talk 04:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Additional comment: I just realized my CAT:CSD link above may be slightly confusing. Any link a person uses or word they type that's something like WP:NPOV or WT:3RR is an abbreviated version of a policy or process page link. The "WP:" part is short for "Wikipedia:", the Namespace prefix for pages like the village pump or Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion that aren't articles but rather for discussion and management of the Wiki. The latter part is either the initials of the linked page (WP:AFD is Articles for Deletion, where we debate the merits of low quality pages that are not eligible for speed deletion), or a keyword from the policy (WP:CRYSTAL is Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball, the policy against speculation). You'll see them used a lot on talk pages, mostly because some of the policy titles are really long. (Like the joke policy Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man, which is abbreviated as WP:SPIDER) --tjstrf talk 04:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The notification for speedy deletion tags, as well as their companion Wikipedia:Proposed deletion (WP:PROD) is done by categories, so it's automatic. This is explained in full at Wikipedia:Deletion process, which you don't actually need to read right now unless you plan on nominating a bunch of articles for deletion. --tjstrf talk 04:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit counter

iirc, it should tell you on the page. You have to go to Special:Mypage/monobook.js and then add the following to it:

//Interiot's javascript edit counter if (document.title.indexOf('User:Interiot/Tool2/code.js') != -1) { document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' + 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Interiot/Tool2/code.js' + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>'); }

After pasting that in, save, force refresh, and go back to the edit counter page. It should now display a little box that you enter your name (or another person's name) into and receive the count. --tjstrf talk 06:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Paste it by going into the edit window of this section, btw. It's not displaying properly on the talk page. --tjstrf talk 06:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Let's try explaining this again.

1. Go to User:Danielfolsom/monobook.js.
2. Paste the code I gave you there (with correct line spacing).
3. Press Ctrl+F5 to force a refresh.
4. Go to User:Interiot/Tool2/code.js.

If done properly, it should now display a box into which you can type your name. If it does not work, check to make sure that you pasted the code properly (everything inside the nowiki tags above) and that you are not using Internet Explorer. --tjstrf talk 06:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Yorktown Sentry

A tag has been placed on The Yorktown Sentry, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DÃ¥vid Æ’uchs (talk • contribs) 16:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

Check out WP:Userboxes for more information on the boxes on people's homepages. ~ BigrTex 22:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and just to, you know, think about things: you might want to get rid of the massive images on your page, as well as your every single piece of contact information. If not, just add your SS number and credit card info to make it more complete. If you are really in want of a cooler user page I could make you one. DÃ¥vid Æ’uchs (talk • contribs) 22:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Dude, you don't put where you freakin' live, your telephone, etc. Within as long as it takes crawlers to go through Wikipedia your contact info will be ready to find from Google (search David Fuchs and you'll see how Wikipedia pops up in searches.) Also, don't make another line for your sig, it doesn't follow the : direction and breaks the tabbed flow. Sign on the same line. DÃ¥vid Æ’uchs (talk • contribs) 23:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Aw, you're no fun. I was going to call him at 3AM and tell him that. :-( (kidding, of course) --tjstrf talk 23:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Hee hee... fine, go back in the history and find it and call him. ... but what I mean about the : think is that if you return to create a new line, it loses the tab thing. So putting your sig on another line without the colon

results in this, see?

DÃ¥vid Æ’uchs (talk • contribs) 23:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it for now, I'll show you some stuff later. DÃ¥vid Æ’uchs (talk • contribs) 23:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Looks like you're taking some of the flak directed at me.

The IP who was editing your page a minute ago seems to have decided to attack your page based on your having communicated with me. Sorry about that, someone fixed it already. If he comes back, please report his IP address to the vandalism notification board, and an admin will block him. --tjstrf talk 01:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Funny? Yeah, the first couple of dozen times. After that it gets really tedious. He's not that humorous of a troll anyway. --tjstrf talk 01:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

No, that was me. If you type it like example@whatever.com then e-mail hunting adbots will find it and send you junk mail. Besides, you already enabled your user e-mail so anyone can mail you by clicking the button on the left side of the page when at your user page. --tjstrf talk 02:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rauf Ashraf

The page looks more like a resume or vitae than anything else at this point; I'd agree with not pulling the plug so quickly if that were changed, and additional empirical sources cited. --Mhking 03:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That's actually something at least -- and is certainly more notable than a three-entry resume, which is what the page started out with. --Mhking 03:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries... but thanks for the heads-up! --Mhking 03:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advisors Directory

Take a look now and let me know if there is anything else you need to make it live. Milehighharris 03:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ETAP Yachting

Looks like it got deleted, as a non-notable spam-like article. I was intrigued about the unsinkable yacht claim though. How come everyone doesn't sail one?! --Steve _(Slf67) ^talk 05:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPWatcher approval

Hi Daniel - there's an "approvals process" for NPW, which consists of me, or another admin, adding you to the approved users list. As a guideline (to show policy understanding), I like to see users have over 300 meaningful edits before I approve (meaningful is subjective - I say article edits, vandalism reversions and user warnings). You can have a go at new page patrol without the tool by using the new pages log (Special:Newpages) and tagging the articles for deletion (see WP:SD and WP:CSD for details). Keep up the good work, and hopefully I'll be able to approve you soon. Martinp23 13:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userpage

The Windows/Mac userbox on your userpage has a couple of copyrighted/fair use images on it, which people don't like (Using them on userpages). I suggest using the icons in the Windows/Mac userboxes instead, they're free of copyright problems and are also alot more iconic. 68.39.174.238 07:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The copyright status can be seen by clicking on the image and scrolling down to where the pastel shaded box is. Anyway, the system boxes are here, specifically here and here.

[edit] Sabotage of AfD process

DO NOT remove other people's comments from AfD pages. Such attempts to rewrite history are likely to get you blocked or banned. Henning Makholm 01:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Note about this: an admin has emailed me asking me to remove all the non votes in that section t clean it up, I did as I was told, and you'll notice all the votes are still there.

--Danielfolsom 04:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need magazine

I've deleted the re-posted article. —tregoweth (talk) 04:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Honest mistake

There is no need to apologize to me. You were doing RfC, which is allowed by wikipedia policy.Also, understand that we Indians/Pakistanis can be a little abrasive with our language sometimes (it's a cultural thing mostly) and does not necessarily indicate malice or aggression. Many westerners find this uncomfortable, but 5000 years of society is a hard habit to break.Overall, the situation is very confusing to all parties concerned, with many shades and dimensions that are often ignored by agenda-pushing partisan groups. The goal is to sort out all the issues in the article and present a neutral perspective of the events in question, which is what most editors involved there have been doing until that interloper falcon2020 showed up and disrupted the process. In the quagmire of arguments, counterarguments and confusion of viewpoints, misunderstandings are only natural and entirely understandable.Rumpelstiltskin223 08:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

It may be of note to you that User:Falcon0520 is a sock of banned user User:BhaiSaab.Bakaman 02:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: David Scanlon

The page was an attack, so I removed it. I think I would probably do the same again. The risk of Google caching the page, IMO overrides whatever minor inconvenience is caused to the closing admin (who would be obligated the check the history regardless). Christopher Parham (talk) 00:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted you on that page, however if you choose to revert back I won't again. If you feel that material is appropriate for the article space then that is your call. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

There's no slippery slope here; removing attacks from the article space has been standard custom for a long time and was in the past year solidified into the WP:BLP policy. This is aside from the fact that any unsourced disputed material may be removed at any time. As I said, you are welcome to repost the content if you feel there is value to it being present. Fortunately for you the edit in which you added "Frankly it is terrible that people will beleive a man who is paralized could write such a magnificent peice of literature. Devin Scanlon tried to take this to court but the judgewas black rascist against all "crackers" besides paralized ones." to the article space will promptly be deleted. =D Christopher Parham (talk) 01:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

No, no, don't worry about it. Everyone makes similar mistakes all the time -- I can't count the number of times I've been patrolling recent changes and have reverted one vandal edit only to go back to an even worse vandal revision. It's not even for sure that I'm right -- check out this discussion from a few months back.

The point is just that rigid enforcement of rules needs to be balanced with a bit of common sense -- e.g., if an attack article is blank, don't replace the attacks just because blanking is bad. We always need to be careful about what we put in the article space since that is what we are showing to our readers. Seriously, you are on the right track overall -- most speedy deletion candidates are good faith additions that simply aren't quite appropriate for us. There's no need to blank these, and it would probably be needlessly rude to the contributors who created them. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

You are doing fine, keep up the good work. Let me know if you need help with anything else while you are still picking things up, although my own knowledge is far from complete. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seperation of Church and State

I removed "God(s) and State" from this article because it is not a generally accepted legal doctrine, nor a synonym for Church and State. In the same vein, during a recent cleanup of the article we removed references to Mosque and State and Synagogue and State. These just are not accepted legal or political doctrines. It would be appropriate to say that Baptists point out that separation of Church and State does not mean separation of God and State, but this is then in the context of advocating a particular position, not introducing a doctrine. If you feel strongly about this, I suggest you open a discussion and see what consensus you get. But as I pointed out, we just recently cleaned out similar terms. CBadSurf 01:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/ran

I have deleted this because the comments were not addressed to me, but someone I share an account with (who is now in the process of getting their own account).--Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 05:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adoption

Hello Daniel. Thanks for your message - and your kind words about my contributions. I'd be delighted to adopt you, you certainly seem keen to learn and appear to have all the attributes of an excellent contributor. It doesn't matter how experienced or inexperienced you are, if you think I can help you I will be happy to try.

Just so you know, the adoption procedure is entirely flexible and you (or I) may terminate the relationship at anytime, simply by letting the other know. You are also entirely welcome to seek other mentors at any time, either in addition to or instead of me. I try to keep and eye on my adoptees contributions and will offer advice unsolicited where I can. I'm also very open to questions about pretty much anything - simple or complex - and will try and reply as soon as I can. I'm also happy to help out on any editing projects or article you are interested in, to help it get off the ground, or to mediate if you get into any scrapes.

When I'm convinced you are up to speed on WP (not that you can't carry on learning, as I still find new things every day!), I will let you know and offer to "graduate" you. However, does not mean we have to terminate our relationship, as you will be welcome to remain an adoptee for as long as you wish, until you feel ready to graduate. Even then, I will always be available to offer advice as a colleague. If you are happy with this arrangement, then let me know and I can "do the paperwork". If - after reading this - you decide not to, thats cool also. Rockpocket 07:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! "Paperwork" was a bit of of an exaggeration really, its just a case of putting the adopted templates in the right place. I'll put the correct ones on my (sub)page and yours, but feel free to re-arrange yours anywhere you wish. Other than than, we are good to go. By the way, I like you user-page section of your screw-ups. Its a nice idea, both as a public acknowledgement of the incident and as a reminder to yourself (and others), and will go a long way to diffusing any lingering ill feeling, I would imagine. Good stuff. Rockpocket 07:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Powerslam magazine

Well, the first thing to remember is out WP:BOLD policy. It is great that you are very aware that you only wish to make good edits and wish to avoid mistakes, but please don't ever not make an edit because you feel others are more experienced than you would do it better. A lot of editors will "bully" less experienced editors by suggesting that. So my advice is: think twice, but don't be too afraid of making mistakes. As long as you learn from them and acknowledge them when pointed out to you, no editor should mind if you make an error in good faith, I certainly don't.

With regards to this article, you have done exactly the right thing. Even in its reworked form, that article fails WP:CSD#A7 and probably WP:SPAM. Moreover the editor has recreated almost the exact thing after it was deleted. Now, normally recreating the same article after deletion is, in itself, grounds for speedy deletion. But for some reason articles that were originally speedy deleted are except from this rule (thats one of those weird policy things you only ever learn when you become an admin). So in this case all you can do is retag with the speedy deletion template as you have done.

You could also place "Template:recreated" on his talk page, however, often the reviewing admin will do that themselves. If you notice he continues to recreate the same article over and over, or repeatedly removes speedy deletion templates you can let a friendly admin know and they will deal with it. In this case I will delete the article and leave a note for him explaining the circumstances. The magazine may actually be notable enough for its own article, but it needs sources and a major rewrite. Rockpocket 08:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NBA sourcing

Hi Daniel. Yes, that looks good to me - it certainly is an improvement. Two small things:

• I have never seen a citation in a WP subheading before. However, there is most likely nothing inherently incorrect about it, so don't feel like you have to change it if you think it adds value. You might even start a trend.
• Normally we leave whitespace between the numbered source and the period after the last word in a sentence: For example, we would source this statement like this. ^[1] Not like this^[2].

Other than those very minor things, looks like you are doing great work. Rockpocket 21:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Note: He probably means "Not like this.^[3]

Actually, I didn't mean that, but it too is an example of how not to format a reference. Rockpocket 00:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war?

I saw you also reverted edits to Mcdonalds As you may have noticed I had to revert a lot of edits. I am trying to figure out what to do in that situation, I do not want to be involved in an edit war but I do not want to let the vandal go. What do you tink I should do? Natasha 23:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC) ---Thanks for your opinion: They have been blocked finally:)Natasha 23:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A QUESTION

First off, i am new to wikipedia, i was making a page for a sleepaway camp I went to. All the material there was 100% accurate, and I speant a lot of time constructing it. Where can I at least get the information back? There was no need to be so mean to me. I wasn't trying to advertise. Please help me out, I just want my info back that I typed up. I don't understand the process to contest a deletion.

Thank You --BRappy55 00:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Brian

[edit] Getting Back My Article

I have a question for you. I don't understand what the difference was between my page (Camp Poyntelle) and the page for Camp Tyler Hill. It's the same thing, and I worked hard on my page, and all I want is my information back, I don't think its a lot to ask. How do I just get my page back? Can you email me it, or do I have to create it all over again because I will

--BRappy55 00:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Brian

[edit] Soooo

I am sorry about deleting your post, i didnt know that was vandalism, it wasnt done on purpose. So I went ahead, and contested the deletion...what is my next step? Will someone contact me, do I have to start from scratch, and make a whole new page. --BRappy55 00:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)B

So, I tried to make a post to move to get my page undeleted....i would get rid of any materials that would impose me trying to advertise....because that's the last thing I want to do. I just want my page back up, so I really appreciate you trying to help me. Thank you very much so far. Hopefully this works out.

[edit] Talk:Camp Poyntelle

Apologies, but your comment was lost when I speedied this as the talk page to a speedied article. Your comment should go on the article creator's talk page; let me know if you need me to retrieve it. Thanks for understanding. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 02:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Style

Here's the Manual of Style reference for you: WP:MOS#Article_titles:

Use boldface for the first (and only the first) appearance of the article title and any synonyms of the article title (including acronyms). Use three apostrophes to produce the boldface – '''article title''' produces article title.

I hope that clears things up. Regards, Ground Zero | t 13:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help

If anyoness pretty good at tables could you help me out? I've been near everywhere - and nowhere seems to address this issue. On the Wikipedia page Help:Table, it says always have the values (of things like border, colspan ect.) in quotation marks (border="1") - and they successfuly do this many times throughout the article. However, on a page I was working on found here - whenever I put anything IN quotation marks, they don't work (border is the best example of this). any suggestions? --Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 23:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

It was the semicolons. I got rid of them, and everything seems to be working fine. --Sopoforic 00:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Things to do

Don't worry about asking questions, thats what i'm here for ;) So... you are looking for things to do. Well, there are plenty of administrative tasks that don't require admin tools. Examples include:

• wikifying
• splitting articles
• adding categories
• merging articles
• cleanups

In terms of article writing, you could pick something from one of these:

• Make requested articles
• Join a Wikiproject

If you are interested in mediation you could get involved in:

• Association of Members' Advocates
• The Mediation Cabal

There are a few other things you could get involved in, including:

• commenting on articles for deletion
• commenting on potential new admins

However, its worth taking time to make sure you have a firm grasp of policy before tackling these last two. Rockpocket 02:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Werdnabot

It looks about right. Werdnabot doesn't come around here all that often, so don't expect it every night :o -- Tawker 06:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bill of Particulars

Nice work on creating the stub. I have one bit of advice for you. I noticed you created a reference in the <ref> example ref </ref> format. That is good, but to provide a bibliography for the references you need to write a bit of code under a References subheading. If you paste the following text immedidately before the stub template in the article you will get a bibliography:

==References==

<div class=references-small><references /></div>

--Rockpocket 07:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome! I'm glad you are getting involved in AMA, though don't be too discouraged if you don't manage to resolve too many disputes - often one of the two editors involved will be pretty unreasonable and refuse to engage. Still, if you can help in any way it is a step forward. Rockpocket 08:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tsunami Butler's response

Thank you. I have sketched out my argument at User_talk:Tsunami_Butler/sandbox. --Tsunami Butler 16:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the AMA!

Hello Danielfolsom, I see that you have decided to join the AMA. I'll be the first to say welcome! We're always in need of more advocates, especially since were backlogged most of the time. Before heading into your first case, please take some time to familiarize yourself with the AMA FAQ's, the Guide to Advocacy, and the AMA Handbook.

Just a few pointers for what we do. We communicate by putting a template on our talk page. The template is {{AMA alerts}}. The AMA also has it's own IRC channel, which reports new cases and alerts to us. It can also be used as a place to ask for advice on an issue. If you'd like to jump right into a case, you are free to check out AMA Requests for Assistance, which is our new request for advocacy system. The instructions for how the technical part works is on it's talk page. You can also use the AMA userboxes that appear under here. If you have anymore questions about the organization, just ping any advocate's talk page, including our coordinator Steve Caruso or deputy coordinators Wikiwoohoo and Aeon. Again, welcome to the AMA! -Royalguard11(Talk•Desk•Review Me!) 21:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Background image

It's a CSS hack, which basically draws the background image, then draws all the content (in a position:relative DIV) beneath it, then pushes the content up (by the height of the bg image) using negative positioning:

I'm not sure if that is a good idea. Background images make the text less readable, and it can cause layout problems in some browsers. ed g2s • talk 16:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

If it's for the main namespace I suggest using as few colours as possible, just the "infobox" class usually. ed g2s • talk 16:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Illegal immigration template

Thanks for the work. I'm concerned that the picture isn't neutral. It implies that there is a connection between the legal immigrants who have arrived in the past and illegal aliens arriving today. Many people contest such a connection. (If everyone agreed that that was a legitimate conneciton, I don't think the debate would have as much traction as it does.) While the following pictures may not have been approved, something like them is more appropriate http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/images/Video_Demonstrating_MexFlag.jpg http://www.immigrationcontrol.com/images/Americans-Attacked.jpg http://www.sullivan-county.com/immigration/imm_local/p5.jpg -Psychohistorian 17:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

"the reason I put the statue of liberty was because of the famous "Give me your tired, your poor, you weak ..." quote that seems to be the center of the debate (whether the U.S. should abide by it or not), but that's ok if you want me to change it." Actually, this is why it should not be used. IIUS is not about whether the US should allow immigration. The Statue of Liberty is a symbol of immigration, not illegal immigration. Many MANY people who oppose illegal immigration are staunch supporters of immigration. The debate is not about whether the US should abide by that quote, its about whether it should have a right to secure its borders and exercise national sovereignty. As for the pictures I suggested, the good thing about working on this with someone else is that it is easier to get to a neutral position when we can each exercise editorial control.-Psychohistorian 00:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we can get much more safer than that and safe has got to be the highest priority.-Psychohistorian 22:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't like that new one so much. It leaves it up to the imagination as to why the white people in the bottom picture are so depressed (not to mention, it paints the issue as 'whites vs. others' - there are many minorities who oppose illegal immigration), the pictures don't capture the idea that it is illegal immigration, not immigration in general, that the debate is about, I can see arguments coming up over what picture should be at the top and what one should be at the bottom, etc. I know you are working hard and I appreciate that. Its easier to be a critic than to do the work, I realize that. So, please don't take it personally, but I just don't think this option is going to work.-75.179.159.240 00:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Fake Notice

I find your fake notice about a nuclear attack quite worrying. That not something to joke about. Please take it away or link it to a page like joke. --TeckWiz^Talk Contribs_@ 01:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Daniel. I have to concur, I'm afraid. While some Wikipedians do have jokes on their userpage, it generally isn't encouraged. Moreover, if you are serious about possibly becoming an administrator one day, such things will very likely work against you. If you browse the user pages on WP:LOA, you will see most admins keep relatively sober userspaces. It is ultimately up to you, of course, but its something to think about. Rockpocket 01:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I think its less a case of anyone really believing it, its more a question of understanding the purpose of userspace in Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:User page for our guidelines on what we may and may not have on userpages). As I said, plenty of people do bend those rules. However, since conferring adminship is essentially an assesment on judgment and understanding policy, experience tells me that a number of editors would !vote against any candidate that had joke templates on their userpage. Rockpocket 19:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

There is some remarkably strange and gullible people browsing Wikipedia, I guess that is the only explanantion for it! As for the signing thing, you can use the following template {{signed|Rockpocket}} which gives you: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockpocket (talk • contribs)

[edit] Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 19:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wdefcon

is there any way to get it to show what the user wrote and also the level that the original defcon is?

sure- ill work on it, the alignments keep messing up though

--Flyingidiot 21:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC) New! Clock! New! PageMirror!
Done.

AIV Danielfolsom/Archive's WikiDefcon is at 4 VC
Normal levels sustained.
Use Info= for this . --Flyingidiot 21:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
newuser contribs ---- Change level

And click the star to see what the defcon is at.

sureWihich ones auto update? if i saw the code for one i could adapt it.

--A system for auto-update is set. it should update daily.*

p.s Template:Micintosh <----lol

Change level/edit added.


*(please note that, in its current state, the "auto update system" is more of a quick and dirty solution than an actual system)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks. Piotr Seranov 00:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

Is there a way to say if they input something into the template( {{{Template|LIKE THIS}}} then it should be a link,but if they don't it shouldn't? Really appreciate any help here,--Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 16:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, but I think you might want something like this:

{{User:Timrem/Sandbox4|m}} gives this: //

{{User:Timrem/Sandbox4}} gives this: //

// Add date and time to your monobook "personal menu" list at the very top of the page. // Created by [[User:Mathwiz2020]]

// Indicate where you would like the time to appear: // 1 is first (before username), 2 is second (before talk link), ... 7 is last (after log out link) insertBeforeNum = 5;

// Do NOT edit below this line unless you're experiened in javascript insertBeforeArr = new Array("","pt-userpage","pt-mytalk","pt-preferences","pt-watchlist","pt-mycontris","pt-logout",""); insertBefore = insertBeforeArr[insertBeforeNum];

function makeTime() {

 var li = document.createElement( 'li' );
 li.id = 'pt-time';

 var mySpan = document.createElement( 'span' );
 mySpan.appendChild( document.createTextNode( 'date and time' ) );

 li.appendChild( mySpan );

 if ( insertBefore )
 {
   var before = document.getElementById( insertBefore );
   before.appendChild( li, before );
 }
 else // append to end (right) of list
 {
   document.getElementById( 'pt-logout' ).parentNode.appendChild( li );
 }

 getTime();

}

if ( window.addEventListener ) window.addEventListener ( 'load', makeTime, false ); else if ( window.attachEvent ) window.attachEvent ( 'onload', makeTime );

function getTime() {

   var time    = new Date();
   var date    = time.getUTCDate();
   var months  = 'Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec'.split(' ');
       month   = months[time.getUTCMonth()];
   var year    = time.getUTCFullYear();
   var hours   = '0' + time.getUTCHours();
       hours   = hours.substr(hours.length-2, hours.length);
   var minutes = '0' + time.getUTCMinutes();
       minutes = minutes.substr(minutes.length-2, minutes.length);
   var seconds = '0' + time.getUTCSeconds();
       seconds = seconds.substr(seconds.length-2, seconds.length);
   var curTime = hours + ":" + minutes + ":" + seconds + ", " + date + " " + month + " " + year + " (UTC)";
   datePlace   = document.getElementById('pt-time').childNodes[0].childNodes[0];
                 datePlace.replaceData(0, datePlace.length, curTime);
   doTime      = window.setTimeout("getTime()", 1000);

}

You can look at User:Timrem/Sandbox4 to see the code I used for this, and see meta:ParserFunctions for more about this kind of stuff. There may be a better way to do this, but it does work. Let me know if you need more help. Happy editing! timrem 19:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NOW i got it

This User is sad because he/she feels bad about stealing another User's page design

with link

you might need to organize your userboxes. click here.

oh sorry, must just be IE:mac... should use safari. --Flyingidiot 20:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 20:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes your user pages

I converted your table to wiki syntax as discussed. I don't know why you nested your tables like that, but I preserved the nesting. As for the user boxes, I can recreate what I showed you and save it, but I need to know if you added any user boxes.

As for deprecation, it just means that it isn't supported anymore. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The NoGod box is fixed. It was a minor template coding error. Also, be aware that the your NoGod box, Adoptee box, and Micintosh box might be forced to use new names. First, all user box names in the template namespace must begin with "User ". Second, WP:UM requires that all opinion and belief user boxes be moved to the user namespace. (That means they would be a subpage of some user's user page. That is how I create all my templates. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok. The nesting is gone. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

You created those boxes? If you move them to your user space, you can safely skip the "User " prefix part. However, I would suggest making your gallery something like User:Danielfolsom/User Pages (pick another name if you want as long as it is in your user space) and putting your boxes into subpages of that.

As for what went wrong: Each template that includes a <noinclude> tag must have nothing between the last character you want to see and the tag. The template in question had a series of newlines there. Since those were outside the <noinclude> tags, they were included in the template expansion. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to request the old templates be deleted. You can use the Move tab to move them. If you do want to delete them, since you created the templates, you could use {{db-author}}. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] done

i have finally gotten my Wdefcon temp to match the one on the template page. all you need to do is replace the current template with {{Wdefcon|prefix=User:Flyingidiot/alert/}}

AIV Danielfolsom/Archive's WikiDefcon is at 4 VC
Normal levels sustained.
Less than 100 edits/minute to begin with... only ~5 reverts/minute. Still some though. Calvin 1998 (t-c) 05:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
newuser contribs ---- Change level

oh and its ok if you want to ask another 100 questions,
im getting a little bored with no templates to make, lol --Flyingidiot 18:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose Wall Street Crash of 1929 as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Wall Street Crash of 1929 was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 69.143.167.110 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Yamla 03:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please subst warning templates, sign posts, and use up to date templates

When using certain template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you!

Also, please be aware that {{vandal2}} is now deprecated. The current templates are listed at WP:UWT. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IIUS Template

Okay, sorry its taken awhile to get back with you. I am no longer participating in Wikipedia. I've found that it is prone, no, it invites, small, radical political minorities to band together and push an agenda, thereby destroying Wikipedia's credibility on articles of a political nature. Frankly, I'm just tired of fighting it. I want to thank you for the effort you've done. I know you've worked hard on this. Since I'm no longer going to be participating in Wikipedia, however, you should probably work with someone else if you want to finish this template. -Psychohistorian 13:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On making your page look cool

I suggest "borrowing" other people's code. As its wikipedia and technically under the GFDL, they shouldn't mind! Lots of people have theirs as templates, for example, my header is on a subpage, User:David Fuchs/bar. Other users who have cooler stuff going on... User:Daniel.Bryant, User:BostonMA, some others... all those cool boxes, etc, are CSS and HTML generated, so it should be easy to modify them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by David Fuchs (talk • contribs) 19:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of crisis hotlines by country

Hey. I completely agree with the deletion of this, but you created the deletion discussion as an Mfd, whereas it should be an Afd. You can see the instructions for nominating an article for deletion at WP:AFD#How to list pages for deletion. Thanks, Prolog 05:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed it from {{subst:afd1}} to {{subst:afdx|2nd}}. You can now create the discussion by following the redlink. The last discussion was over a year ago, so don't worry about it being the second nomination. Prolog 06:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Considering this list is clearly in violation of WP:NOT and the phone number entries are either unverified or unverifiable, I'd be surprised if this survived again. Prolog 06:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that you might want to add {{db-author}} to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/List of crisis hotlines by country. Prolog 06:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

Hi Daniel. Nice work on those templates. I haven't got around to making a template myself yet, but I'm always impressed when other do. So well done. I have been pretty busy myself recently, so haven't been doing much editing beyond attempting to sort out tedious civility issues with problem editors. However, you seem to be doing just fine. One question though: Whats with the Jimbo "POV Pusher" Wales on your userpage? I don't have much of an opinion on Wales either way, but do remember that he is another Wikipedian and therefore WP:CIV and WP:NPA applies in reference to him as much as any other editor. Is there a reason for labeling him as such? Rockpocket 05:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. You'd be surprised at some of the accusations leveled at Wales by some editors, including POV pushing. There was an incident where Wales edited his own article regarding who founded Wikipedia - which is a big no-no - which caused a bit of a fuss (See Talk:Jimmy Wales#Co-Founder). So I wouldn't be too sure it was mean as a joke by the person you borrowed it from. Rockpocket 06:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MensKeperRa

This user doesn't even have his facts straight about who created the article. My involvement is minimal - I objected to his lobbying users to delete the article concerned. This user has ramrodded through several AfDs that in my opinion were unjustified, getting his way by actively lobbying other users and posting histrionic derogatory screeds about the subject in the AfD. He seems to have ulterior motives, but I would hesitate to guess precisely what they are. If he bothers to make his first point, I might respond, if it is logically and not emotionally based. Best regards, Jefferson Anderson 16:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Really? I haven't finished catching up on my watchlist yet this AM. I'm sure I'll figure out what you mean soon. :-) Jefferson Anderson 16:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, just caught up with his "closing" his account. A peak at his last edit before blanking his user and talk page shows he had no use for consensus unless it agreed with him! I suspect WP is better off without him, for now at least. Jefferson Anderson 16:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A B Spelling template

Typically, documentation for templates looks like the docs on Template:Uw-test3. If you review some of the templates in Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace you'll see that hardly any of them use background colors for the documentation, and people certainly pay enough attention to them. I'm not going to get into a fight about this, but random people are likely to keep coming across the template and fixing it to match the rest, so you might as well change it, or go and try to get consenus to change all the other ones. Hope this helps! JesseW, the juggling janitor 03:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Holy crap you're way too smart for me to follow (sorry, haven't gotten used to the wikipedia - uh - lingo (see what I mean?) yet. But when you say background color are you talking about the orange stripe in it - cause I can def. take that out easily, I mean I only added it to seperate the pic from the text.Daniel()Folsom T|C|U 03:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC) (Copied from User_talk:JesseW)

I'm not sure what Wikipedia specific lingo I used, but... I was referring to the white on black text in the list of arguments for the template. I don't have an opinion on the colors of the actual template -- people have made complicated suggestions about those, but I don't understand them well enough to say anything, but I do think we shouldn't use white text, just because it's harder to read, and people can change it to black if they perfer in their own systems. JesseW, the juggling janitor 06:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

By "house style" I mean the way things look on the Template:Uw-test3 page; starting with Usage just in bold, followed by enough wikitext examples to show the common forms of the template, followed by textual notes documenting more subtle aspects of the template. And, although it's an added flourish for a low-use templates like this one, putting the documentation on a seperate subpage, and transcluding it onto the template page. Hope this helps. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remove Auto

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 158.59.200.115 lifted or expired. Request handled by: Yamla 16:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

There are about 24 people using this IP at one time (as it is a computer science classroom) including myself and User:David Fuchs - all in all 72 people use this ip per day. Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 16:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi and Go Template

Hi Daniel. I made a few edits to your template, and just thought I would let you know. Actually, I came across it entirely by accident, and didn't realize you had made it until I noticed the talk-page request redirected to here! Rockpocket 09:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] testing testing testing

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Here's a clock so you don't forget the time: User:Flyingididot/clock TESTINGG!!!!!! TESTTESTIIIIINNNNNNNNGGG!!! 16:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Testing testing testing test2

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Here's a clock so you don't forget the time: User:Flyingididot/clocktest 2

That should do it.' Flyingidiot 16:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How i did that

i just removed the endcap for the table, and it most likely will show in the archive —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flyingidiot (talk • contribs) 16:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Numbers

I've replied on my talk page. Oh, and thanks for pointing out the POV problem on the Play n trade article. I'd assumed that the statement was true, but without references (which I've been unable to find), it does read a lot like advertisement. Cheers, Black Falcon 22:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Imagemap

http://tools.wikimedia.de/~dapete/ImageMapEdit/ImageMapEdit.html?en now you have your own logo! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flyingidiot (talk • contribs) 12:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Hi...

I've replied on my talk page. MastCell 16:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving WP:REQT

Thanks for helping with the cleanup at WP:REQT. After the backlog gets worked down, I was thinking that maybe unresolved requests should stay up for a month, and resolved requests for a week. Does that sound reasonable? —Dgies^t c 20:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh wow, so I just had another idea for archiving RTs. Maybe this would make things too complicated - but the goal is to have a easy start page. Ok, so you know how currently users will go to the page and portentially be kidna overwhellmed at all of the text - I'm thinking that maybe we should auto-archive everything by using Werdnabot (where you can say archive after 3,4,5 ... days) and put them into a page called "to be categorized" or something. This way we can have a system that tells people exactly what should/shouldn't be archived (anything that hadn't been archived by Werdnabot stays) and it makes it less daunting- what do you think?Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 20:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok for some reason I'm having a strange issue on my watchlist - could you respond on my talk page - sorry for the inconvienience ...Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 21:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the volume of requests is small enough that once we get all the old stuff archived, there won't be much need for an automated solution. —Dgies^t c 21:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] good one!

hah, i figured you would revert that edit i made. I just couldnt resist taking advantage of it. anyway, no harm done. thanks for the info on the elementary schools and such hahahahaha.Realtimekid 00:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Day's journey

I like to reconsider your opinion. I propose remove the del tag. I just searched for the journey distance. I hope it will not disaper til tomorow. For the name I'm not shure singular day of jaourney or plurar. What do you think ?

Nasz 07:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi!

Hi Daniel. Thanks for the offer. At the moment, I have been busy helping set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Reference Desk Article Collaboration, there are a number of random articles in there that need writing if you ever feel like doing some research on a random topic!

I've been checking out your contributions and you appear to be well into the swing of things, which is great. You are doing excellent work. Moreover, you now seem to be pretty adept in the ways of Wikipedia (more so than I in template creation, it seems!). While I am very happy to remain as a mentor for as long as you wish, if and when you feel ready to branch out of the official adoption programme just drop me a note. I have no qualms with you flying the nest, so to speak, and will be pleased to graduate you whenever you feel ready. Of course, whenever you choose to graduate, I will always be happy offer advice if needed. In the meantime, keep up the good work and let me know if i can be of any further assistance! Rockpocket 08:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose Rwandan Genocide as this week's WP:ACID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Rwandan Genocide was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

[edit] Muslim#Other_words_for_Muslim

Did you mean to leave the duplicate paragraph? Shenme 20:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, but I hope the rate of traffic won't build up that much! You did motivate me to finally Archive from March 2005 to December 2006 though. Thanks. Shenme 21:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Awards

There are three proposals which need some comments. Please weigh in:

• Moving the LGBT Barnstar
• Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
• New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar

Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik ^(talk) Barnstar]]

• Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
• New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar

Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik ^(talk)

• Once again, someone disagrees with my interpretation of our very loose guidelines. Now I don't mind when two users like WJBscribe and Kathryn_NicDh%C3%A0na, but they've taken the disagreement and posted negative comments over at that RFC.

So ... could you please weigh in one last time ... new barnstar or a wikiproject award Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/New_Proposals#The_Copyeditor.27s_Award. Thanks. --evrik ^(talk) 22:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Signature

I can make you a signature somewhat like mine... if you'd like. I don't have the time right now, though.

//MaraNeo127^talk 05:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm making it, but it might take longer than usual (usual is about five to ten minutes, because of the color coding and all that other stuff) because I am currently doing something other than editing Wikipedia. Do you have any colour preferences?

//MaraNeo127^talk 06:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I posted Suggestion #1 on your Signature Suggestion page. If you want it to be only in the Latin alphabet, that is fine. I just saw the characters under the "Save Page" button and was inspired to build a stylized text signature. I could also take away the box and allow for an in-line signature, use my signature and simply format it to fit your details, or you can suggest some random template. Don't feel that you can't ask me to change it if you don't like it. Just explain your needs and I will (eventually, when I get to finishing everything and having time to do them) make your perfect signature.

//MaraNeo127^talk 00:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Meep.. I hadn't seen your reply on that page... I'm making you other ones for sure. It's possible, but not likely that I do another right now. The background was the one of the lightest shades of orange I could make it... I like how you told how you really felt though! That's what I told you to do. Apparently, you can follow directions well. Good boy. *pats your head* :P

//MaraNeo127^talk 00:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ejanniger

Thanks for drawing my attention to Ejanniger. It puzzled me too, as the editor was indef blocked and indef blocked users shouldn't be able to create userpages. I wasn't sure if he had been unlocked so I contacted Nishkid - the original blocking admin - who reminded me that it is in talkspace, and indef blocked editors can still edit their talkpage (unless it is protected). His talkpage was protected for a long time, but was unprotected the other day, which is why he created that page after being silent for so long. Rockpocket 02:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards Coordinator referendum

There has been some conflict at Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards. Please vote on the Coordinator referendum. --South Philly 19:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combing and hovering

I keep seeing you around, and thought to ask your opinion. I work kinda slow, just puttering through Recent changes. But going slow means I kind of end up reviewing recent actions. (Everybody quicker having sped past me) And so I see regretable things like this, where a vandal comes back and trashes an article shortly after one (or several) reversions. And the last trash sticks around. Now please don't think I'm pointing at you in particular, I see this with apparently everybody. And so the questions, two actually.

First, why don't people review all the recent changes by a revert-worthy vandal? I see a bad edit on Yellow and revert that. I check out that IP. I then check out the previous vandalista IP in that history Special:Contributions/70.117.198.214, looking for Top. And that got me to Kolinovce, where I find other graffiti. Quite often the vandals don't just do one bad edit, and I keep finding that people haven't looked to see the other 3 to 9 bad edits that need cleaning up. Why don't people check out a vandal's history?

Second, I find that someone will notice a bad edit, correct it, leave a warning, and then ... move on, never looking back. I'm really enjoying MS IE's new (cough) feature of tabbed windows. Find a vandal and, if recent, I leave a tab open on their User contributions. When I get to the end of Recent changes or another break point, I refresh each tab window. And about a quarter or more of the little buggers booger again! So why don't people keep watch on recent vandals by keeping a window open for each?

Anyway, I'm still puttering along with unadorned Lupin's popups, but wonder about the techniques other people use, and don't use. Shenme 06:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit to Wikipedia:Requested templates/Uncategorized

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Requested templates/Uncategorized (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 13:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Response, notice the page name, UNCATEGORIZED - now why would I have removed templates from UNCATEGORIZED ... could it be to EAT THEM? ...no... damnit the answer has to be somewhere!Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with my signature?)} 13:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for helping to fight the good fight on the Catcher in the Rye. This entry gets its share of odd edits.Bluestripe 23:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Hello Daniel. I have been pretty busy recently, thus I haven't been editing much. Regarding resized or references in columns, WP:FOOT is what you want, specifically this subsection. A summary can be found at Help:Footnotes. Regarding quotes, is reference 13 in this section an example of what you mean? If so, then the <ref>...</ref> markup is used just as it would be for a reference, except the quote is included between the tags e.g. <ref>"This is an example" (Rockpocket, Wikipedia, 2007.)</ref> would give you this. ^[4]

1. ^ example
2. ^ example
3. ^ exanoke
4. ^ "This is an example" (Rockpocket, Wikipedia, 2007.)

If there is another accepted way of doing it, I am not aware of it. Rockpocket 04:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

If information you want is linked from WP:FOOT. Specifically the Template:Reflist will make references small and/or in columns. It used to be done with markup until the template was created. Rockpocket 05:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes. That is using the older referencing system explained at WP:FN3. Basically you can label the citation number ("ref label") to anything you want (hence the 1a), but you have to make sure it matches up with the number at the citation text itself ("note label"). That system is no longer recommended, since the new system matches them up automatically, but is still used on some older pages. Rockpocket 06:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

I've reverted the addition of the "obnoxious" template to multiple articles; clearly it has no consensus for the insertion within articles, secondly it is not(typo fix [18:34]) standardized, thirdly it has no direct purpose nor is it actually compliant/backed by any policy (you'll have to do better then appending "per WP:NOT", etc). I'd advise you to get consensus to insert that template within articles, it is disputed. Matthew 17:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry no - you aren't a vigilante of Wikipedia - you say all of those things yet the discussion is still going on. When a page is nominated for deletion - do you delete the page first and delete the links to that page - no, that's absolute crap and you should know better.Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/|^{(Can you help me with my signature?)} 17:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Consensus - Your edit to pages insertting that templates is disputed, thus the onus is on you to get consensus for the template (the TfD will likely decide this). Matthew 17:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I've not said anything of the such, please do not misrepresent my comments (WP:TALK#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable, "Don't misrepresent other people"). Matthew 17:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion has a clear defined process, your argument "by my logic" is a clear argumentum ad ignorantiam. When the edits you make to a page are disputed you get a consensus to implement them (etc). Addendum: I've no interest in chatting with you all evening - If you can get a consensus to implement your edits then do it.. if not we'll see what the outcome of the TfD is. Matthew 17:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{obnoxious}}

Calling something "obnoxious" is obviously a bit hostile, and the template seemed to have something of a sneering tone. It's just not the sort of language appropriate to throw around in templates. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Response and further conversation on his talk page ɗάɳɪзɺʄʘḶʃŏɱ Â© A Â»block me 22:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Daniel. I'm going to respectfully decline from comment in this TfD simply because I'm really rather ignorant in our policies regarding non-standard template creation and usage and thus my opinion would not be informed. My feeling is that templates are self selecting: the ones that are used widely will prosper and the others will become defunct in time, but thats not a particularly strong basis for policy. I'm, personally, not a big fan of non-standardized templates but thats simply an argument from WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and therefore not a good reason to !vote. Rockpocket 08:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My signature shop

Hello, Danielfolsom. As a reply to your comment on my talk page, yes, I still am keeping the shop open. I just wasn't on Wikipedia for a long time. And also, please check the sig shop itself. †Sean gorter†08:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About content from my user page

Yes, I know. I responded to his comment on his talk page. I didn't exactly want to... hm, "force" the concept of talk pages on him, since I had already told him a lot (and wanted to be welcoming, not too creepy); I figured that I would remove it after about an hour. No matter, though. Thanks for telling me! Gracenotes^T § 03:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sig

Yes, I've realized that many people cannot see most of the characters I chose. I was at a relative's home and asked if I could use their computer to check my watchlist, edit a few pages, etc. I came to your page and saw that many of the characters could not be encoded. They became the bordered white box that sometimes appears when the text is not supported. Since it is a Holiday, I will probably not have much time to Wikipedia. Hopefully by next week I will make you a new suggestion. I think that Night Gyr's suggestion was a more reasonable choice. It fully complied with the Wikipedia Signature Guidelines. Maybe we could use this website somehow to check if the colors are visible by colour-blind editors.

I am thinking of changing the "127" part of my signature to a darker yellow, for it is barely visible against the off-white background of Wikipedia pages. What do you suggest?

//MaraNeo127^talk 19:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changing link colour in a table

Unfortunately, I don't think it's possible to change link colour for an entire table at once. You can change the colour of an individual link link this: [[Main Page|<span style="color:red">Main Page</span>]], but you can't get that to apply to an entire table without editing each link individually. Hope that helps! --ais523 15:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for Clarification

Thank you for your clarification on the naming of Yogurt. I fought hard for the American spelling, but as long as there's good justification, Yoghurt, is alright. bernlin2000 ∞ 22:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit Revert

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Requested templates/Uncategorized (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 20:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I feel like i've been reverted by this bot before ...danielfolsom© 20:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: NPWatcher

Hi - at the moment, the standard is just 500 edits, and a fairly clean record on Wikipedia. Thanks, Martinp23 21:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:pnc nominated for deletion

See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --Kevin Murray 23:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diffs

Are you sure your not high? The diff format is unchanged as far as I can tell. In the old version paragraphs which differ are yellow and in the new version they are green. Text removed within a paragraph is shown in red on the old version. New text within a paragraph is shown in red on the new version. If a whole paragraph was removed or added, the text is not red but just black, while the other side is blank (white). Unchanged text is black on grey, only parts before and after changed text is shown. I don't see any green triangles. See also WP:DIFF. Rockpocket 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense. By the way, your monobook.js is at User:Danielfolsom/monobook.js and your monobook.css at User:Danielfolsom/monobook.css. Rockpocket 00:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] odd warning

I see what I did. I hit edit on User talk:Spec Ops94 top of page to edit the section to add the warning and it brought up the template edit not edit for User talk:Spec Ops94. You got it fixed no harm no foul. Thanks -

I copied this from my talk page. You know I haven't quit figured the replies to people. I mean sometimes I just reply right there where they ask the question other times I reply on thier talk page. Others do the same with me. I wonder if their is a consensus on it :-) --Xiahou 01:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your NPWatcher Application

Dear Danielfolsom,

Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.

Martinp23 22:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Shakespeare

Hey, just noticed your work on Romeo and Juliet and wanted to invite you to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Shakespeare. Feel free to take a look and participate in discussion. The project is very new and in need of good editors. Wrad 04:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Odd talk pages

I guess, by the standards of this page, there's nothing odd about Template talk:IIUS. Anyway, I think what the other user found disconcerting is that the "Archive" link itself is inoperative. It's blue and looks like it should work but nothing happens. -Will Beback • †• 06:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, now I see what the problem was. You'd created a section with the heading "archive", then centered the TOC and placed it directly below your archive box. So it seemed logical to click on "archive" to see the archives. I made the TOC less fancy and renamed the section. I think that will make it clearer. -Will Beback • †• 07:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SM³ Discussion

You need to take a breath here. You and Big are getting into it over nothing. You are both longtime editors (certainly longer than me), and I can see the signs in both of you that indicate that people are just using the other person's edits as ammo for their response. You two can figure this out, if you just take a bit of a break and cool down. Just some friendly advice. Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 08:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks like I posted a bit too soon. Good job on getting a handle on the other things bugging you. :) Cheers! Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 09:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kirsten Dunst pic

Hi there, Daniel. I noticed you changed the picture on the Kirsten Dunst article. Could you tell me why? A picture of Kirsten signing autographs in 2005 isn't exactly an improvement over her posing for the camera in a 2007 pic. Furthermore, David Shankbone is a press photographer who shares his work here on Wikipedia, free of charge. His photos are usually high quality red carpet pics. You should generally not change his uploads unless you have something really great to replace it with. Anyway, I changed the pic back to what it was and wanted to give you a heads up. Talk to you later!--Atlan 00:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Feel ready to graduate?

Hi Daniel. I thought I would stop by to say 'hello' and see how you are doing. I've been checking out your contributions and, with well over 1000 edits, you appear to very comfortable editing now. Moreover, you now seem to be pretty adept in the ways of Wikipedia, indeed, your technical prowess is much superior to mine! While I am very happy to remain as a mentor for as long as you wish, I feel you are more than capable of branching out on your own now and would be pleased to "graduate" you from the adoption programme if you feel ready. Of course, even after graduation I am always available to offer advice or comment as a colleague. Let me know your thoughts. Rockpocket 06:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey! You are totally welcome to remain adopted as long as you think I can be of help; I'm pleased to have you. Whenever you do feel ready to move on (and perhaps consider adopting a new user yourself!) just let me know and I will do the paperwork and award you with your graduation certificate ;) Rockpocket 06:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spidey

How about reading the previous section on the talk page where an explaination is given for the very things you are adding.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

First, YOU are the one that is misusing commas. You have two complete sentences separated by a comma instead of a semi-colon. The grammer itself is fine. Wording can be changed, but the grammer is not as horrible as your a claiming. Second, Peter never "dated" Gwen. They went on a date, and that was it. Second, MJ breaking up with Peter was a ploy by Harry to get Peter to come to him. It's irrelevant to the whole, which is just Harry luring Peter to him. Wikipedia is not a substitution for watching the film. If people want to know WHY or HOW they can go buy a ticket.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

What spelling mistakes?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

First, when contents are underdispute, you keep the original status until the dispute is finished. Reverting without continuing to discuss is basically saying that you don't care what the discussion leads to, you are going to do what you like. Second, it doesn't take anything to pick some words out that are misspelled. I'm curious as to what my WORD couldn't find?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't take much to list what is misspelled. You can take precendency all you like. I'll clean the plot up before it gets nominated for any status anyway. The only reason that this is even a debate only 2 editors is because only a few of the people that actually know how to edit on wikipedia have had a chance to see the film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

First, even if you can induce a block (which I don't see Admin on your page), that's abuse of power to win an argument. Second, I didn't revert you a 4th time. I've only reverted you 3 times.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

You might want to read the 3RR policy. The 3RR is only broken on the 4th revert. Now, if you wanted to be a ass you could report me, because I broke that rule way earlier today when I was reverting unsourced information, and original research from the main part of the article. Yes, even doing the right thing still gets you in trouble, because I've dealt with plenty of other fellow editors that had either been blocked, or warned because they reverted more than 3 times on a given article, even though those reverts where removing legitimately unsourced information (which is what you are supposed to do with unsourced information). And the reverts don't even have to be connected. You can revert 4 times in an article, and do it in 4 different sections, and be reverting 4 different editors. Doesn't matter to the review board. As for what you do now, I'll read it later because it's 2 am here and I'm going to bed.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and copy edited what was there. I left a couple things on the talk page that I had issue with.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, be prepared, the guy that added a crap load of details, plus named all the characters (even though they were never named such in the film) is about to do it again. He's got an "inuse" tag up now.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

So did I. If you respond again I'll read it in the morning. I've gone from 2am to 3am and I'm tired. I have no problem with the plot as whole right now, other then the couple of things I pointed out to you on the talk page. If the case deems necessary we can continue the debate tomorrow. I apologize for allowing things to get so heated.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe he did steal it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 07:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I really am off to bed now. I'll find out what happens when I wake up. Happy editing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 07:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha, it is a popular film so naturally there are idiots who set out to simply annoy people. Tis' the mindset of a vandal. Anyway, semi-protection always helps. Which reminds me, better do it to At World's End. Alientraveller 20:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Well that's what happens when your article is the second on the Wiki Charts. If they have to register to vandalize, or just put in unsource information...well at least we'll have a 3 day window that they will have to wait till they can edit semi-protected articles.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

It's only 3 columns in FireFox, IE shows only 1 column. If you change the font for FF, it would probably look better to you personally (speaking of course you are still working with FF's default font).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gang Article

Do you think the Gang article can be eligable to add a short organized crime section on there? Agtaz 23:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thats it. Commited by gangs, like a while a ago, it did have an section of that, but then someone must has vandalby removed the section. Agtaz 23:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fanfic.net

The addition of an 'Unreachable staff' section is not a personal attack on a site, which, yes, I use and appreciate everyday. I do not know how to cite the absence of any support link on the site (go ahead, try to find it), or state the removal of the subdomain names support.fanfiction.net and support.fictionpress.com ... if you think this criticism is biased, please explain why. Respectfully yours, JOL.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.231.174.160 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Might be interested

I noticed that you took part in State terrorism by United States of America discussion for deletion. After the article has survived many deletions, you may be interested that there is a user right now who is deleting large portions of the article. 69.150.209.15 17:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Yoghurt

Daniel, just to be clear, I don't mind at all that you let me know about the discussion, I just think it's crazy that people continue to debate this. I thought the last time would have solved the problem once and for all. Well, I guess "consensus can change" is kind of a mantra around here. Anyway, I hope the discussion reaches a satisfactory conclusion, but I probably won't particpate further. --Akhilleus (talk) 00:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] archives

I've deleted the archives you tagged with {{db-author}}. If you ever want them restored, just leave a note on my talk page. - auburnpilot talk 05:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Phew - I think it's gone ...danielfolsom 22:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

There was a major technical glitch that caught up a couple of hundred editors. Threads on AN and ANI if you're curious, but seems to be resolved now. Regards, Newyorkbrad 23:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler RFC

I noticed you voted "No" for the 4th straw poll. However, that seems to go against your debate history on the RFC page. Maybe you just misread the question but do you mind clarifying why you decided to change sides all of a sudden? Axem Titanium 04:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

So you would say "yes", they are insulting and thus shouldn't be used? Axem Titanium 13:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Everyone has an off-day. Axem Titanium 19:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your user page

Hello Daniel. Thanks for pitching in to help revert my pages from the unwelcome attentions of my very own banned troll. Its getting a regular to be a regular event now, but its much more effort for him than it is for me, so we'll carry on, no doubt, until he finds something better to do with his time. I realized that I never commented on your user page. It looks very nice indeed. I much prefer the understated look, and I think yours is now an excellent example of that. One other thing, looking at your page reminded me of something that I had planned to do the other day, after using your Template:Hi and Go a few times....

		The Template Barnstar
		I hereby award you this barnstar for your fine contributions to templatedom. Rockpocket 07:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler warnings.

Anyone who doesn't believe I could be polite and reasonable hasn't looked, even briefly, at my edit history. Generalizing about me because of a single, angry talk space post is, frankly, insulting. dharmabum 08:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not denying I went over the top. Honestly, I was drunk, and in a bad mood to begin with, when I posted the "What. The. Fuck." message. I have apologized for the tone and profanity of my message on that page.

I'm saying that your inability to believe I could write about a given topic "politely" is a generalization based on a single edit that contradicts thousands of others (although I don't deny a history of profanity, which I quite enjoy using, or angry rants, on my own user page), and asserting such a generalization in complete ignorance of my history on the project is insulting. dharmabum 12:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Userpage

Any idea why it's showing up on Category:Candidates for speedy deletion by user? Cheers, alphachimp 04:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Do you want your user page to be undeleted? (It was probably deleted - not by me - by a mistake; it included some userbox nominated for speedy deletion.) - Mike Rosoft 11:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• Done. - Mike Rosoft 11:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Section and a Bit of Silliness

I don't know the convention for starting a new section with a "+"; I have only been successful with "==" at the bottom of the otherwise last section.

For some reason, I started to read the Great Yogurt-Yoghurt debate. I presume it's too late to try for my personal favourite, "Yogourt"? Bielle 02:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC) with tongue firmly in cheek.

Thanks for the "+" tip. I had seen it, of course, but had no idea what it was for. Like most noobies, I do things first and then find out how they should have been done afterwards.

Re: Spelling debates and other high drama. . .It is my observation that the best admins would also probably be very good nursery-school teachers. So much of what they have to do is along the lines of: "Now, now children, play nicely. Don't pull Tananda's hair, Mikayla, and Achmad, it's not your turn to play with the big truck. If you are going to cry, please sit in the Unhappy Corner until you are finished. Zaphir, that is not a nice word. You tell Jason you are sorry for being so mean." Bielle 02:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] (Don't mention the) Name of (the) article

Dear Mr Fulsom, if you're not aware of references to famous satirical jokes, please don't accuse others of vandalism. Just ask for an explanation.Eyedubya 11:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Clearly you haven't understood the subtlety of the distiinction.

You wrote, "You're altering the title to a "joke" as you said - regardless of how famous, it's still vandalism.danielfolsom 11:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I said I was making a reference to a joke, not making the title a joke - a subtle but important difference. The title 'Name of article' does not reflect the content of the discussion. The discussion isn't about the spelling of the word yog(h)urt anymore. The discussion is about the actions and ethics of editors and such like.Eyedubya 13:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yogurt

Hi Dan,

I did not mean to imply that I agree with the assertion that you violated policy. Based on how your comments were indented, it appears that you think that's what I was implying. I apologize for any confusion that my comments may have caused, and request that you ident your comments so that they address those who actually make the assertion that you are denying. Thanks. --Serge 17:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed about the article "Yoghurt" here. The following have been listed as participants:

• Cultural Freedom (talk · contribs)
• Danielfolsom (talk · contribs)
• GTBacchus (talk · contribs)
• Serge Issakov (talk · contribs)
• Mets501 (talk · contribs)
• SchmuckyTheCat (talk · contribs)
• Mark (talk · contribs)
• Antonrojo (talk · contribs)

Please visit the request page to indicate your acceptance of mediation. I urge you to accept, as it doesn't seem like we're getting anywhere arguing on the talk page. —METS501 (talk) 02:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Yoghurt. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] Template:sp

I support your efforts to apply this template and, time permitting, I am looking into a client-side solution to the problem. Antonrojo 15:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Welcome Templates

Hello, sorry, but I'm kind of confused; when have I used welcome templates?—Preceding unsigned comment added by KeybladeSephi (talk • contribs)

[edit] Gay left

I've started a fresh article. I even managed to put a table in it! Could you check it over for correctness? I still need to add internal Wikipedia references and external links. Thanks Derek

Daniel I'd rather not add the women to the collective members' table as it could be confusing. I'd rather create a separate table of contributors which I know how to do. I'll try to do it in the next day or so but it'll take time as I have to go through the ten issues. Also I should create references to the ten issue pages where they're mentioned. Can a footnote reference be referenced more than one in an article? Thanks Derek 05:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added a Contributors' section and included a table which lists all the contributors and which issues they appeared in. Is this over the top? Is this sufficient to substantiate the statement about women contributing to the journal? Thanks Derek 07:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll use the cite template as much as I can. Not sure how it would relate to the table of collective members. Also the masthead wouldn't have an article title but the Title is the only compulsory value. Thanks

btw I'm off on vacation tomorrow until Monday so it may not be done before then. Derek 11:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Daniel

I'm back now and will be working on the citations and footnotes in the next couple of days. Derek 09:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

References: For each issue there is a specific page with a whole issue on it: http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue01.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue02.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue03.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue04.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue05.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue06.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue07.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue08.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue09.asp http://www.gayleft1970s.org/issues/issue10.asp

These could be included as references that are referred to more than once. So where it says GL2 it would be a reference to issue 2.

The comment at the start that lesbians contributed frequently needs an internal reference to the Contributors table.

Also the two tables have column headers referring to specific issues which can also use the same issue references.

I'm not sure what more is needed.

Derek 09:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{prod}}

Hello,

Articles on non-notable bands may be frustrating, and you may not agree with removing the tag, but still, you can hardly blame that fellow for doing so. After all, that's what the tag actually says to go ahead and do. (No, really, it does.)

Regards, --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 04:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Restoring removed PROD template

Resolved. Page placed on WP:AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treacherous. Od Mishehu 11:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

If a {{prod}} template is removed from a page, by a user who is obviously trying to prevent the page from being deleted, please don't put it back, such as you did with Treacherous]. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it. Instead, feel free to list the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Od Mishehu 07:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The reason I re-added the prod template was because the user didn't know what a prod template did. He/she kept putting the "hangon" template up, which is obviously for speedy deletions (and sometimes when people put the hangon template up they remove the speedy tag because they don't know any better, I figured it was the same here).danielfolsom 11:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The placing of a {{hangon}} is clearly intended to try to prevent deletion; This means that the article shouldn't be PRODed. Od Mishehu 11:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why thanks

[edit] Hello

Please do not come to my usertalk page and *protect your admin buddies* all I am stating is talk to me first and talk about your issue do not report me for it is low class and rude.--Migospia☆ 21:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

You please read my talk archive and see how they were calling be a bad editor and STOP accusing me things and saying You might not like the policy, when I respect the policy. And what I am saying is a 24 hour block under the circumstances given was in abuse of power with the admins, especially since I contribute a lot to Wikipedia and I was unable to edit all articles, I think if some *thinks* I am about to break a policy let me know because in doing so I would have stepped back and talk on the talk page when I still plan to do, I just thought it was clear vandalism removing of abuse template in that article, but have come to realize the hate on Wikipedia and things like this are allowed and Wikipedia has selective vandalism--Migospia☆ 21:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The block should not have happened and to me it was overly long, I do plan on disusing my issue I hope people would take the time to read it and use logic to come to the conclusion--Migospia☆ 21:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your closing in some ways and I do plan to bring up the discussion--Migospia☆ 22:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I never blanked any pages so do not accuse me of anything please and do not go and talk about me behind my back beacuse it is VERY rude--Migospia☆ 00:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I know too many users involved, like I said in the veganism talk blanking that was because it was harmful to the article, you can blank things from articles if they are harmful, nonsense, and vandalism, It was not like I was blanking information that would help Wikipedia so that does not make any sense, I was shocked that it was there for so long attacking the article to me is not good for Wikipedia, when did I violate 3RR after I the first?! What comment from David, the minor edits thing was just someone attacking me personally and pushing me around, so I would also like to know whats going on!--Migospia☆ 00:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I did not say WORNG DELETE, and read what I said on the veganism talk page the health risk are no different than any other basic diet other than B12 again how did I violate the 3rr?--Migospia☆ 00:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure I am becoming defensive, but uncivil? No as well as my edit summaries say: /* Hello */ Response and no I did not say wrong delete I said: (→Health effects - Way too biased, and mostly not true), but people do not discuss removal of harmful text in articles or vandalism, only controversial or disputes. You and a few people are talking things a bit out of proportion and some even personally attack me, that is not civil as well as accusing me of a variety of things, which of course I have to defend myself in, also please come to me first if you have a problem do not go to your buddies user pages and talking about me--Migospia☆ 01:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE with the vegan article also state as well as with any other poorly planned diet, again excluding vegans as dysfunctional not cool--Migospia☆ 01:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Portuguese books by title

Sure has a lot of red links... I'd run the list past WikiProject Portugal to see if they have any future plans for the list. As it stands, it's undefined, and basically useless and I assume far from being complete. -- Longhair\^talk 23:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It's no bother. We at WP:AUS are doing very much the same thing with lists; doing away with the useless ones, and where necessary, redirecting or combining them into something actually useful. Cheers. -- Longhair\^talk 23:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Knowing When

Sometimes being helpful is knowing when to stop posting on a userpage where your posts are unwelcome. When someone is angry, its not always a good time for involved editors to point out the other editor's poor behavior.

Lsi john 01:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] okay

I am only uncivil to those who are uncivil me and stalk me and make personal attacks, it is not cool and I should not have to deal with it, and no at least 3 users made personal attacks to me and is stalking me so no that is not helping me, I did not mean you personally were attacking me like I said I just do not want you to chat me up with your buddies here on Wikipedia or accusing me of things, the other people where attacking me that's all--Migospia☆ 01:26, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Knowing When

(I prefer to respond where the conversation started.) I meant only that Migospia☆ is clearly upset and your posts on their userpage do not seem to be helping to cool things down. Though, admittedly, I could have mis-read it.

I posted a couple times, trying to help, and pretty much got my eyes scratched out. Since Migospia☆ doesn't know me at all, and I wasn't rude, it's clear to me that Migospia☆ is upset and needs some space.

Take my post as worth 2x what you paid for it. (nothing) :) Happy Editing. Peace in God. Lsi john 01:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh my fault - yeah, I think space is all she needs, she's a fine editor, she's just defensive - probably because so many editors got involved. I'm trying to force myself to unwatch that page - because I'm reading the comments and I'm thinking "awww, ok see if I just remind her of this - then she'll calm down and everything will work out" - but the problem is I thought that a bunch of times. Well I did my best, honestly I'm just not good enough of a person to be able to create peace in that situation - but either way it was nice talking to you here in this brief time and I hope to work with you later!danielfolsom 01:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll be philosophical.. just this once.. Peace for one person cannot be created by another. Peace must be sought after and achieved by oneself. All we can do is create the space in which peace can be found by being peaceful ourselves. If rejected, we then remain, unobtrusively watching, until such time as we might be invited back. Perhaps that call will come, and perhaps not.

Sometimes people don't want help. Sometimes people dont want peace. Sometimes they want the conflict because thats all they know, and they're comfortable with it. The trick, is in deciding if we are making the situation better or worse by being helpful.

Our paths may cross again. Who knows that the fates have in store for us.

Happy Editing. Peace in God. Lsi john 03:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template

I'ts commented out on my page... maybe I'll put it back, maybe I won't, but you can use it by putting {{subst:User:David Fuchs/awesome}} on your page. David Fuchs ^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 12:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. The problem with your archive is that clicking the new heading button by default drops it below the archives, and therefor disappears. I think you need to revise your layout. David Fuchs ^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 12:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Daniel, I've read this:

[edit] Coral Smith

Thanks I just got nervous when User:EverybodyHatesChris went to David Fuchs page to talk this, he actually did that 11 times in a row.--Migospia †♥ 19:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually he came back I tried to talk with him, but he reverted my edit again and calling it vandalism.--Migospia †♥ 03:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input on the talkpage. It was appreciated. LessHeard vanU 20:10, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I also found and listed sources I added on the talk page and made it more clearer in the article.--Migospia †♥ 06:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your incivility

YOU wrote on Migospia's discussion page:

Hey, so I've read through the MTV source, and I think it's questionable enough that you should try to look for another - just to be on the safe side. Also, EverybodyHatesChris has gone bezerk, just to let you know ;D. But seriously, if he calls one of your edits vandalism again go ahead and report him, cause that's absolute crap. Also, if he threatens to report you - 10$ says he wouldn't even know where to go to report someone - so try and challenge him on that

Daniel, you told her to try to challenge me on something? You're trying to create more problems between her and I? You also say 10$ says I wouldn't know where to go. Daniel, thats complete incivility and disrespect. This is a big reason to report you, Daniel. I think you've been incivil enough. I will have to report you now. I'm sorry EverybodyHatesChris 05:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Daniel. EverybodyHatesChris referred me to the comments above. I appreciate how difficult it is to walk the tight-rope between two warring editors sometimes. It seems like you can't win, you are too friendly to one and you are biased, too friendly with the other and the same accusations happen. Welcome to the life of an admin! However, its worth always keeping in mind that your comments should be aimed at resolving the situation in a constructive manner, and "10$ says he wouldn't even know where to go to report someone" has little obvious purpose other than to belittle EverybodyHatesChris. When your comments are not constructive, then you often become part of the problem instead of part of the solution (God, I sound like a management book!)

I'm certainly not immune from making these mistakes myself, for example, my interactions with Migospia the other day stopped being constructive long before I stopped talking with her. However, there is a difference between a content dispute and WP:NPA violations and when dealing with the latter, you have to put on the admin hat and accept that you are going to be the bad guy. Anyway, I think when you read your comments over in the cold light of day you will appreciate what I mean. You are a great editor and experienced enough now that I don't need to tell you what to do, so I'm going to leave you to negotiate this tricky situation with EverybodyHatesChris yourself. Just remember what the ultimate goal is here and what you need to do to achieve it. I have asked EverybodyHatesChris to have a look at his behaviour also, so hopefully everyone can start afresh and keep focused on the content. I'm sure you will be able to sort the article out and remain on civil terms with both editors, though that may mean re-engaging on better terms and keeping cool. Rockpocket 06:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I guessed as much, but those sort of asides are usually better kept for email! The real reason Migospia shouldn't be intimidated is because she isn't vandalizing. Therefore EverybodyHatesChris could report her as much as he wishes, it would not be taken too seriously. You are going good work here, though. Rockpocket 06:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EHC blocked

Please note I gave User:EverybodyHatesChris a 3 hour block (since expired at the time of writing) so he might contemplate the consequences of continuing his method of contributing to Wikipedia. I have no great confidence that it will have the desired effect, so I am noting this to you in case he attempts to include you in any further actions/reactions. If you have any further problems with this editor (I am watching the previously effected pages, including this one) please let me know. LessHeard vanU 19:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] yoghurt

I don't really think dscarth had a right to call your arguments fallacious just because he didn't agree with them. That's not fair EverybodyHatesChris 05:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I said argument. Singular form. Meaning the number of edits on a given article doesn't give one person any more credibility, nor any more authority, when participating in a discussion. --Dscarth 16:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Guys, be civil towards each other. I've looked at the whole argument and I see things like you saying bullshit, Daniel. Dscarth, telling him that he presents his argument fallaciously isn't going to help the problem because what you were referring to wasn't even fallacious. It's just going to make him feel bad which he has a right to feel if you say his arguments are fallacious when they aren't. Also, Daniel, you assumed very bad faith about Dscarth earlier on my talk page. I like you and I'm glad we made up Daniel, but you never assume bad faith about anyone here on wikipedia. This is what you wrote on my talk page, Daniel:

Actually, just so you know - I have a plan with the yoghurt page. See if no one comments on the spelling for long enough (even if it's just Dscarth) I can archive the debate. See the reason this time is so frustrating is because we had actually just voted on it and there was no consensus - usually that will end the debate at least temporarily - because the article itself is not that great and it's better to focus more on the article. So again, I'm trying to archive it but that means I have to restrain myself from replying to dscarth - who seems intent on just pissing everyone off to continue debate

Please take a look here Wikipedia:Assume good faith}}. EverybodyHatesChris 17:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Daniel, don't bring up my accusing Misgospia of vandalism again. It was something that happened because she didn't have a good enough source and kept reverting the page so I thought it was vandalism. Once Rockpuppet informed me it wasn't, it never happened again and that was a long time ago. You're unwilling to accept that you showed bad faith to Dscarth and I had to show that to Rockpuppet. Sorry! EverybodyHatesChris 21:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

For the record I have no actual anger or ill will towards you. For clarity, by 'you' I mean danielfolsom, not EHC. I think the whole debate was a dead end from the get-go, because if you cant get a reasonably large number of editors one way or the other then nothing happens. I'll keep an eye on it, and if there is a significant push for "no H" then I'll be there. --Dscarth 15:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EHC

What allegations have I made against you, Daniel? Have I really been that unfair towards you in just trying to get the two of you to get along and work things out? The argument was taking up the whole page. I don't know why you're mad at me for trying to help out EverybodyHatesChris 23:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

First, you have no business getting in the middle of an argument between two editors unless they specifically ask for your input. If we needed a third opinion, I'm sure we would have asked for one using WP:3O. Furthermore, you are coming up onto our talk pages trying to start shit, and warn me for something I said on a talk page? To quote Wikipedias policy on liking other people, WP:UNCIVIL: "You don't have to like an editor as a person" ... I DONT LIKE YOU. --Dscarth 18:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archive problems

Hi Daniel. I don't know a way of having an archive at the bottom in this manner without running into the problem over the plus button inserting questions beneath it. I don't think it is possible, I certainly haven't seen anyone else do it. By the way, you work on Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy is very good, well done. (As a European, I find it a very funny article. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. I especially like the picture!) Rockpocket 05:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yeah

The last comment (the "I DONT LIKE YOU" one) was directed at EHC. Thanks for backing me up. I checked and didn't see me as reported anywhere, so heck if I know what that guy is thinking. --Dscarth 01:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Left

Thanks for doing the references. Do I still need to do the journal template stuff? Derek 12:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanx Daniel

Daniel, I can't get over what you wrote on Rockpocket's page. You were willing to get banned and have your reputation ruined all for what you believe in. You showed just how much you like that man. I don't know why, but it put me in tears just reading it and I just wanted to give you this for your show of heart and bravery. I love you man.

EverybodyHatesChris 05:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh and yes, now the name can stay as yoghurt the way you wanted it to. ;) hehehehehehe EverybodyHatesChris 05:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Haha! All right, see you around. EverybodyHatesChris 17:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clean up on Starscapes and other articles

Hiya -- I was the person to stick the original CSD template on Starscapes, and just wanted to say how good of you it was to spend the time generally cleaning it up in an attempt to save the article. You've done a good job -- I still feel that it's a little too spammy and not sufficiently notable, but it's really cool that you took the time to help out the original contributor. I've noticed you do that before on Wikipedia, and just wanted to say how impressive it is -- nice job, Mr! -- Sjb90 21:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Newbie

First answer these: You can't say something and not explain, why is newbies part of the shortcut and considered a guideline fo wikipedia? since when did newbie become dergatory? how calling somebody a newbie for no reason that to calll someone a newbie with reason the same thing? why bring up nigger when there is better ways to get your point across?

also note: you brought the rocket thing up okay NOT me also side note: this has been going on to long if you guys were clear to me from the beg it would have been resolved future note--Migospia†♥ 03:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Bottom line: Newbie is not even commonly recognized as a derogatory term and especially not the way I used it. Also you should not try and justify that by mention a highly recognized derogatory term against half of my race to try and prove a point that is not even there. Also don't bring up anything in the past between me and Rocket you have your beliefs and I have mine, and I know he attacked me but its over with. Anyways I hope you understand now and have a good day peace!--Migospia†♥ 03:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC) Daniel according to my talk page you did brig it up first: 'From what I remember he didn't attack you ', dont lie wiki records it!--Migospia†♥ 03:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:LOVE

I sent you an e-mail hopefully you got it trying to clear things up, but anyways hopefully we can be friends and not jump to any conclusions in the future! K? --Migospia†♥ 04:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

=( Well I thought it would, and with Coral I did not revert and then talk, don't say things if you do not know, I talked about it first, then after I saw it was not getting anywhere I asked for your help, so then that makes no sense and that is not my style. And again with veganism I can't seem to get through to you there is not negative side of being vegan so don't try and say I was erasing the negative side when fist there is no negative side and second I did not erase anything, it was just worded all worng and I expressed my concerns it seemed okay until someone unfamilar with the orgin concern came along but now the issue seems to be resolved. So yet again you are worng about that. And no I just said you made a mistake coming into an already okay conversation turning it into an argument and making it go on for half a day, so you are again worng about that because I never continue to think that multiple expierienced users and an admin are wrong and have made huge mistakes and that you have made none. See I have admitted to the mistake I made a long time ago which is irrelevant to anything you won't even admit to yours you have made in one day. And who is this not one person? You and Rocket? Yeah okay that makes sense, but please re-read my e-mail it would clear alot up, also please stay true to yourself because normally you are very nice and get things very clear and don't accuse me or anybody of anything. Take a step back, breath and then if you still feel the same way re-rread everything and then say gosh I should not have said anything today there was no need to, or I should have stopped while I was ahead of myself. All you have done was state false lies. But if you want, hate me I rather you not though because it's not cool--Migospia†♥ 05:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

You are mistaken about the vegan article and you don't know because you came in late and only saw what you wanted to see which is not cool. And you statement:

where do you get off thinking your better than every editor?

Whoa! I never I said I was and I do not think such a thing! Where do you get off hating me and being so mean?--Migospia†♥ 05:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EHC

Hey guy! I added to the discussion in Migospia's talkpage :) EverybodyHatesChris 08:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Migospia

Hello Daniel. I just wanted to let you know that I have decided that the best way forward is to simply shum Migospia for a while, for her own good as much as anything. My advice to you would be to do likewise.

I really do appreciate your efforts to defend me from the growing list of allegations, but there really isn't any need. Migospia can, and it appears does, work herself up into an indignant rage over the wrongs that she feels have been made against her. She can claim time and again whatever she wants about me but - as you can see from LessHeard vanU's very sensible analysis - when a rational analysis is made by a third party, it doesn't stand for much. Words are words, It doesn't really bother me when I am sworn at and called a liar, really.

The problem with arguing with her is that it just muddies the water. Its patently clear that there is nothing you or I can say that will make her change her mind (infact, I expect there is nothing anyone can say). While I know that you are not just jumping to my defence because of who I am, rather that you are trying to be a voice of reason, to Migospia it appears like we are ganging up on her. Of course, to me a number of editors saying the same thing simply re-inforces that I may be wrong. To her its a co-ordinated attack. Its all about how you look at things, and I fear that Migospia has a very different perspective on the motive of other editors offering advance, than you or I do. The bottom line appears to be that as soon as anyone disagrees with her then they too will be accused of lying or hatemongering. I have seen this sort of self-assertion before from other editors and, well, lets just say that I have never seen Wikipedia change to accommodate them.

Of course, its not my place to tell you who to talk with. That is entirely up to you. I just wanted to give you my current take on things. I have asked for some advice on how to move forward with Migospia, because while I am more than happy to avoid her as much as possible, I'm not willing to turn a blind eye to policy violations simply because communicating with her is so tedious. Rockpocket 21:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I endorse Rockpockets advice not to interact with Migospia at the moment. LessHeard vanU 21:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please note

I would advise you that I have posted a comment, asking for clarification, at WP:AN EverybodyHatesChris (talk · contribs) possible trolling? regarding EHC's conduct, which involves you.LessHeard vanU 22:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My user page

Just a note to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage a couple of days ago, Daniel -- much appreciated :o) Course, I'm probably asking for trouble by having userboxes that translate as "I'm a pedant"... -- Sjb90 09:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey Daniel -- I just thought you might be amused by this... After seeing your excellent example of helping authors improve contended speedy deletion candidates, I've since been taking a second look at any articles that have a 'hangon' tag added after I include a CSD tag. Sometimes, as you say, people just need a little guidance to shape the article into a form that can be kept. However some people really do shoot themselves in the foot by discussing the CSD on the web forum of the subject that is potentially non-notable.

E.g. on the web forum for Tim Binnall, under consideration for non-notability speedy deletion, a chap with the same nickname as that of the Wikipedia author writes: "shit well some wikipedia fucktard has marked the page for 'speedy deletion' ... i kind of embellished a little" and a chap with a nickname of the subject of the article replies: "We'll dupe those fuckers into thinking we're legit." Made me laugh -- doesn't exactly help their case :o) -- Sjb90 07:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply -- yep, my favourite comment on their forum was "Wikipedia people have a notorious reputation for being nit picking aaaassssholes." -- reckon we could get that accepted as a new tagline for the site? -- Sjb90 11:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Left

Daniel - how do I stop people with just IP addresses vandalising the page by adding junk and self promotions? eg the last edit by 212.219.116.4 which I've now removed. Thanks Derek 13:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This article violates WP:NOT

I want to be clear, WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information, which paragraph says the article violates it I can't find it. I would not mind a delete since there is a cat for it which I hope the name could be change and if some admin can move to a sub page of mine--Migospia†♥ 04:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, maybe can you change the title to Black Rock or black rock musicians?--Migospia†♥ 04:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Lists of musicians- why the hell is that here and its sublists?--Migospia†♥ 04:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Stuff Maynard

Nice to see you stop by vegan. Not sure what caught your attention, but those links will be interesting to watch.

I got involved on that article via WP:AN3RR and it has been an education for me. I'm neither pro- nor anti-vegan.

There is pretty much nothing in the article which is anti-vegan, yet they fight about the 'concerns' section on B12, as if it is a cancer that will drive away everyone.

I'm at my wits end with them. Hopefully giving them some real anti-vegan citations will wake them up.

Thanks for dropping in. Lsi john 17:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I see you posted on Migospia's talk-page. That situation has been an energy drain. Three or four of us have been trying to explain 3RR for days and for some reason none of us are making any headway at all. I had to back away, because it was getting too frustrating and I was about to lose my temper with her. Lsi john 18:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. And the paragraph is already targeted for 'culling'.. haha.. I knew it wouldn't last. Lsi john 18:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Any group that sees 'concerns' about B12 deficiencies as 'pov-concern-trolling', is bound to delete real criticizm quickly. I take multi-vitamins, I'm not a vegan, so vitamins certainly wouldn't prevent me from becoming vegan. It's amazing what some people get upset about. Lsi john 18:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC) Then again, I have my less-proud moments in the sun too! :)

I think the way to learn now is by trial and error. I would venture that a minimum of 40-60 hours collectively has been spent trying to explain 3RR. From my perspective, now its figure it out or be blocked. Lsi john 18:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Left

Per Wikipedia's categorization rules:

• Most specific category — Category:LGBT itself is only for the most general, universal top-level LGBT-related articles, such as gay, bisexual, lesbian, etc. Anything more specific goes only in the most appropriate subcategories, not in the parent.
• No category duplication — as the article is already in both Category:Cultural journals and Category:Philosophy journals, it does not also go in Category:Journals at the same time. Bearcat 06:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough — I mentioned it to you because you reverted the first time I changed the cats. Bearcat 15:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halo Group

Daniel

Thanks for your advice - I will read the policy again and try to figure out where I am going wrong. I guess that if I link to the various articles tha have appeared about The Halo Group over the yearss in the tradiaionl press that would help and I will do that.

Denise Goodwin Pace(—Preceding unsigned comment added by Denise Goodwin Pace (talk • contribs)

I've read the policy and added resources. Am I on the right track?
Denise Goodwin Pace 20:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletions

I noticed you placed a speedy deletion tag on All at Once. However, the reason you gave does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion. I changed the tag to a proposed deletion. You canfin dout more about the various processes for deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Cheers! --Ginkgo100^talk 02:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re 68.40.253.199

No problem. He was just a right-wing nut job, and Wikipedia has enough nut jobs of all stripes anyhow. Sometimes you just can't get through to 'em. BTW, you see the spoiler thing has popped up again? David Fuchs 17:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Um, its kinda going on several places... at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning, and finally Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-27 Spoiler. Enjoy the reading. David Fuchs 17:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

I don't think its that easy, 'cause basically what it comes down to is one side thinks spoilers are uncyclopediac, the others are vice versa. David Fuchs 20:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No worries

Thanks. No worries.

It's just one of those situations where ignoring is probably a more effective option. That one has an interesting history and if he continues to post, after being asked to stop, well.. thats the definition of harassment and is easily dealt with.

Cheers! Peace.Lsi john 22:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Danielfolsom, I have attempted to have civil discussions with your friend, Lsi john, on a number of talk pages. His violations of WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL made those discussions less productive than they could have been. Lsi john should be aware that I have exercised a great deal of tolerance for his views. If Lsi john does not want to have a discussion with me, then he should not discuss at all. I attempted to resolve several points with him on his talk page, but it is difficult when he insists on terminating it and getting the last word.--Fahrenheit451 02:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to your posting

Danielfolsom, just look at the whole posting, not one sentence, which destroys the context. I began by politely asking him on his talk page for some data, having assumed he was a member of the cofs. That quickly escalated as you see. When I started editing Wikipedia over two years ago, I worked on voting method articles. I had no interest in scientology articles. I started watching the admin notice boards and found an inordinate number of scientology-related disputes. These were all between cofs members and other editors, some of whom were scientologists not affiliated with the cofs and others who were not scientologists. I began editing some scientology articles and found the same phenomena that I had observed with other editors. I have not stopped editing those articles since then. I have observed that they seem to attract and create their own opposition from tendentious editing practices. Most of the editors who I have observed who have caused disputes with the scientology articles have been admitted members of the cofs. I have no objections to anyone practicing the subject. I have no problem with anyone who is a cofs member - I have friends who are and am friends with scientologists who practice outside the cofs. It is the lack of good faith, the incivility, the personal attacks, and POV edits which I object to. Over to you.--Fahrenheit451 03:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive

A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 03:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] cool fonts

Hey Daniel, how do you get your name to come up in a cool font when you sign with the four tildes? Charlie.somerville 04:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Well, hello there you LIBERAL KOOOK! Seems you caught yourself a live one up there ^^^. Thanks for checking in, Wikipedia:Spotlight is a very nice idea, and a great way to focus attention of specific articles. Would you believe I have never used IRC (what can I say, I am a Luddite), so I'm not sure it is for me - but I may give it a try sometime from home (my work computer will not allow it).

I have been pretty busy in real life, so my Wiki-activities have been curtailed recently. Nevertheless, I have written a few nice little articles from scratch. My favorite being Hampden in the sun (which made it to WP:DYK). I wanted to challenge myself to see if I could make a decent article out of something that, on the face of it, would appear to be unverifiable, but that nevertheless is culturally entrenched (at least it is where I come from). I think it worked out pretty well. Other than that, I made the mistake of getting involved in an issue about whether Irish Republican Army prisoners, arrested for terrorist offenses could be categorised as Prisoners of war. Unfortunately our policies have seemed to be forgotten among the POV of both sides. Rockpocket 23:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

The IRA thing is complicated. I think with something as controversially subjective as that we have to with the strict definition of the phrase as per the Geneva Conventions. The sources that I and others have found suggests that the IRA has no valid legal claim to the status under Geneva III. No-one has come up with a source saying that have. However, the UK government afforded some prisoners Special Category Status, which is essentially a type of POW status. Also some people were interned, and I think that is a valid claim for POW status per the convention. So, according the the sources, SCS and interned prisoners are valid POWs and all the rest are not. Rockpocket 06:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My talk page

Hi. Please stop posting on my talk page. Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 15:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, again. This is the second time I am asking you to please stop editing my talk page. I have already discussed this topic with you on Talk:Veganism. Thanks for your attention. —Viriditas | Talk 16:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

We were told to leave the talk veganism page - and there's no other place to discuss - but again, what do you think about the new link: Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Article_structure - first bullet + note.--danielfolsom 16:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello, for a third time. If you look above this message, you'll notice that I asked you twice to stop using my talk page. Our little conversation has concluded. Now, for a third time, would you be so kind as to stop editing my talk page, this means of course, ceasing null edits in order to communicate with me via the edit summary and tripping the message tag. So, in case this didn't make sense the first three times, I'll repeat myself for a fourth time: please stop leaving me messages on my talk page, in the edit summary, and in null edits of any kind. Thanks again for your attention. —Viriditas | Talk 16:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok sorry about that - when you were violating policy just so you could talk on the veganism page I figured it was a sign you wanted to talk - however it seems to me that again you just won't admit that they're discouraged. I've pointed to two different links - only one of which you have addressed, and even then you ridiculously claimed that criticism isn't controversy.--danielfolsom 16:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Daniel, please don't make false accusations about me. And criticism is most certainly not controversy. Look up the words. —Viriditas | Talk 16:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

A) You deny that you talked on the veganism page despite the fact that the discussion had nothing to do with the topic as there was no criticism section suggestion? B) DID YOU READ WHAT I WROTE! I did look it up - see the part where I say from dictionary.com --danielfolsom 16:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

See criticism and controversy for further explanation. Thanks for the discussion, but I must ask that you stop tripping the new message header on my talk page by leaving me edit summaries. Thanks again. —Viriditas | Talk 16:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah - i forgot that Wikipedia was more reliable than dictionary.com.--danielfolsom 16:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Space Coast Academy

Thanks so much for your comments regarding Space Coast Academy. I can see where you tried your best to help me update it and I thank you for that, as well. I'd rather they just remove it. I should have read WP's Guidelines before posting. After going over what you and the editor said, I see where I was wrong. Thanks again and I wish you well. User:MsLadyExecutive

[edit] I know you've been on Wikipedia a long, long time...

Well, not really lol! But, when you wrote: " NOT writting on what you think of the subject) " Which trenchant comment of mine were you cheap shotting? Thanks!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.40.253.199 (talk • contribs)

Gotcha! Thanks for making it plain. (Also, my bad for putting your comment somewhere other than here. Thanks for changing it. I SHOULD know better. lol!)

The only thing I might suggest to you is, if you're gonna single me out for my admittedly strident tone in the Coulter talk section, then you also should provide PROOF that you've written similar warnings to people on the left who routinely post the most poisonous vituperative invective against her not only on the talk page but IN THE ARTICLE ITSELF (if they can get away with it.) Absent this documentation, irrespective of what excuse you may have, I must unfortunately consider you a SELECTIVE enforcer of wik rules based on your on inherent bias thus reducing your credibility to be considered a fair arbiter in this matter.

Thanks for listening and for your attempt at reasonable discourse.

[edit] Daniel added...

"I kind of see where you're comming from - although just because other people put stuff like you said in, doesn't mean that you should. The only person you should worry about is yourself - if you see people making comments like that just remember to remain civil - and if neccesary ignore them."

Sorry Daniel, it just doesn't work that way. I was given the exact same instructions when I first began contributing here and followed them to a T. But I soon realized Wik was run by a bunch of left wing bullies who GAMED the system to weed out conservatives and then brought them up on some kind of phoney baloney trumped up charges to drum them out of wik if said conservative didn't cowtow to their liberal massahs.

I don't have to tell you this, but take a gander at the outright POISON spewed against republicans and conservatives in the talk pages for articles on people like Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter.

Then, when you're ready to APOLOGIZE to me for absurdly singling out my comments and/or begin challenging liberals to stifle their bile (good luck in that scenario! lol) you can comment back.

Otherwise, don't waste your breath. It'll show that you just don't get it and I don't have time to waste until you do.

I do again want to acknowledge and show appreciation for your civility. But civility doesn't work with the liberal mafia in here. Only strength. Which scares them of course and winds up having them charge you in some pre-scripted outcome-determined Matlock-caliber 'trial.' Laughable for me. Embarrassing for them...

[edit] Spoken like a true LIBERAL apologist

Mr. Liberal Wikipedia Editor #1,443,935 wrote:

"You can call it unfair all you want, but that's like watching a truck about to cut you off & run you off the road -but not deciding to brake because you shouldn't have to. Or - if you see other people stealing, and you decide to steal and you get caught - your defense can't be "but they did it too!" -because the fact is you should've ignored them."

Don't lecture me Mr. Liberal. I'll continue to do EXACTLY as I have now that I know you are a liberal that SELECTIVELY attacks conservatives without cause and then tries to defend/distract from his actions with junior high school level arguments.

If there's any consolation in all of this for you, rest assured I believe there's nothing wrong with being a liberal. In fact I was one when I was in junior high too! LOL!!!

[edit] LIBERAL KOOOK threathens to block conservative after liberal KOOK is busted for his selective outrage

I ain't scared of you Mr. Left Wing nut. Go back to the Ann coulter talk page and rebuke those in your tribe who, since you ATTACKED me, have used the talk page to call conservatives stupid homophobic and satan just to cite a few compliments.

Your silence is deafening Mr.Liberal.

You ban/block me (for a comment I made in a TALK page!) and it just makes MY case that this asylum is run by the inmates ALL the more obvious.

Thanks for playing, now run along...

[edit] re: cool fonts

thanks daniel, i knew the html/wiki markup but just not the preferences bit. All the best!

[edit] Underground Railroad

Hello, I tried to access the link to the "Spotlight" freenode site, but I get a page not found. I am technically challenged when it comes to IRC, etc., and so I just went ahead to work on the article itself. For now, I'm working on referencing. Thanks! - Jeeny ^Talk 20:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Christian socialism" in Kievan Rus'

I would like to inquire why you find it expedient to promote a fringe claim that "acceptance of the Orthodoxy as state religion was accompanied by economic reform in the spirit of Christian socialism"?[1] Could you cast some light on this agenda? --Ghirla^-трёп- 18:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that - I meant to only re-add the inline tag, I must've skipped that, I'll remove it right away. However, assuming that because I reverted one too many (one of which I told you about) that I have an "agenda" is ridiculously inflammatory to say the least.--danielfolsom 18:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reference request

hi again,my tag request was about a tag that would notify readers of an article that the article that they're reading is repeatedly citing the same limited sources over and over again throughout its paragraphs.hope that makes sense this time.thanksGrandia01 00:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Danielfolsom,sorry for the bother,the template that you have directed me to only notifies readers that the article relies heavily on 1 source,the template that i'm looking for(and i'm pretty sure others will find it useful too)notifies readers that the article relies on the same 2-3 sources repeatedly throughout its paragraphs.thanks again,hope i'm not bothering you with all thisGrandia01 03:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear sir/madam,big thank you for directing me to this tag,i think that's what we needed. :) Grandia01 04:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mispost?

At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russian history, didn't you mean to post at the section above (about HoR, not HoSU?).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  10:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh - haha, actually yes, sorry bout that.--danielfolsom 11:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: spelling in Gang article

Hi there, Thanks for the comment - but actually I see no policy which I have violated. Changing other's spelling is not a written rule (not that there are any on Wikipedia), only switching excessively between the two (so therefore I would have surely acted positively?). I just made a well-intentioned spellcheck. Perhaps you might consider reading and thinking more before cracking out the whip, cheers :-) - Bennyboyz3000 04:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

You wrote: Hey, you might not know this - but with this [1] edit to the Gang article you actually violated a policy. The spellings that you changed actually weren't spelled wrong - they were just British spellings (for example, British spelling uses Colour and Yoghurt, but American spelling uses Color and Yogurt) - and generally it's best not to change those. I've decided that since there's not much tension around this article - and since it is probably mostly American spelling already, I'll leave the edit how it is - but PLEASE don't do that on any other article - it actually is violating policy and believe it or not people get really upset when it happens (see the Color and Yoghurt archives on their talk pages). If you have any questions about this please feel free to ask me, --danielfolsom 03:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: The editor changed American to British spellings, which as most if not all remember from the "spelling wars" era, is against the MOS, however it's a pretty new editor, so I won't do anything more than simply tell them.--danielfolsom 11:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gangs

Hi! I wrote a paragraph about Texas gangs that you removed [2]. I added it back, and here is why:

• Globalizing an article does not mean removing relevant information about American gangs. That means adding information about British, Australian, and other gangs. Also, my information was sourced, and that adding a ref tag is easy. If you want, you can start an article about American gangs (this is not found on the disambig page) and move the info there. Unfortunately, there is no other appropriate place for my paragraph, so my paragraph should stay until a more detailed article appears. WhisperToMe 21:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

there is one on American Gangs. Gangs in the United States of America - and please don't try and call me out in edit summaries, it's rather inappropriate in addition to possibly uncivil.--danielfolsom 21:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Good - I really believe that I should have seen this in the first place. I added it to the disambig page, and I will add the others too. By the way, I expect being "called out" on talk and edit pages if I make an edit that they disagree with. "Hey, Folsom, you HAVE to include this. 1. There is no other place for this, and 2. Globalizing DOES NOT mean removing relevant information about gangs)" doesn't contain personal attacks. Therefore I do not see this as inappropriate.

Also, Folsom, I have a tip. Instead of outright deleting edits, you should IMPROVE upon them. You could have moved the entire paragraph to Gangs in the United States of America - That would have been civil, and I would have thanked you. WhisperToMe 00:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Meh, whatever, I wasn't in a giving mood after you're last edit summary, but it was still civil removing them, if someone put comments about Romeo and Juliet in Gang I wouldn't move them for that someone, I'd delete it, and if they want it in R+J they can go to the edit history and perhaps learn not to make wild accusations - especially if they're inexperienced editors. Oh and you can be uncivil without making a personal attack.--danielfolsom 00:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess a behavior seen as civil by one person may be seen as uncivil by another. Either way, maybe a good idea is to say "Please talk to me via a talk page instead of via edit summaries" on your user page. Also, I notice that the scope of Wikipedia knowledge is so large that even I learn new tricks every now and then - I have edited Wikipedia since 2003. WhisperToMe 00:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded them years ago, back when I did not need to provide fair use rationale. WhisperToMe 01:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It may be helpful to mention which articles I forgot ref tags in, since I edit so many articles. WhisperToMe 14:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI re Mao

The name of the department that Mao headed in the second KMT executive was called the 宣传部 - the Propaganda Department. It's not a controversial translation, as any Chinese-English dictionary or reasonable reference on Mao would tell you. I do appreciate your concern about sources. I am restoring the edit pending sources, which I will introduce as soon as I can find it. In the interim, check the zh.wiki article and any other standard biography of Mao if you want to be sure that the fact is commonly reported and widely known. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Have added a source (the People's Daily, so horse's mouth, pretty much) and some other events missing from article. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor Review

Hello Daniel. An editor review can often be helpful, though its important that you take any criticism in the right spirit (and don't argue with anyone that takes the time to offer advice!) I think it is certainly useful if you would be interested in becoming an admin one day (and I certainly think you have all the attributes to do so). Rockpocket 19:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving the History of Russia's talk

Sorry, I reverted your archiving as the discussion there seemed relevant. I am sure you've done it with best intentions, but those issues are tto recent to be archived yet. As for the off-topic discussion, I moved it to my talk where it can be continued if parties have an interest in that. Regards, --Irpen 20:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help wanted

I'd appreciate input on the dextroamphetamine talk page, I'd like to conclude that discussion. --scuro 15:53, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Documentation on parameters for {{Articleissues}} template

Sorry to bug you, but you said something about looking up how the article and section parameters work in that template. Have you found anything out yet? Thanks. +ILike2BeAnonymous 02:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "rvv"

Hi Danielfolsom. I noticed you used the abbreviation "rvv" in a revert on {{articleissues}}. Are you aware that "rvv" stands for "revert vandalism"? I just wanted to give you a heads up on that; I'm sure you didn't intend to call editors who oppose the scrollbox "vandals". szyslak 21:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thoughts

Hello Daniel. I don't think your suggestion is crazy at all. You have come a very long way in your editing skills and I think you will make a great admin.

However, I also think that a good nomination for adminship should be at least a three month process (it was over six months from when someone first suggested the idea to me, before I accepted and went ahead with the nomination). I would counsel, if you are serious about this, to take that time to make sure you are up to date on policy, fully appreciate what the job entails and what would be expected of you, rather than go for an early nomination not fully prepared. My advice is as follows:

1. Accept my long standing offer of graduation from the Adoption programme. A propective admin does not need to be an adoptee, and neither do you at this stage. You are very capable of doing being an adopter yourself. Its time to fly the nest!
2. Consider enrolling yourself in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching programme instead. This is something that should take you to the next level and a few months in that should get you ready for a nomination. I would offer to coach you myself, but I think it would be in your interests to have a different perspective at this stage. Of course, I will always be available to offer a second opinion.
3. Diversify! Hang out at WP:AN/I and WP:AN, see what admins are asked to do, feel free to comment or offer opinon where appropriate. You might find that its not for you afterall. Similarly WP:XfD, WP:CfD, WP:DRV, WP:CSD, WP:AIV, WP:AN3 etc. These are the sorts of things admins spend their time doing, get a feel for the process works from the editors side (nominating, commenting, reporting etc), only then will the community be confident you can deal with things from the admins side.
4. Learn WP:5P, it is really important to understand policy, and even more important that you are applying it correctly. This is where admin coaching can really help.
5. Identify your strengths and weaknesses. There is nothing wrong with being crap at certain things (my biggest weakness is in Image space, its beyond how the process should work to deal with problem images), but as long as you are aware of that and address it, then its no big deal. I simply avoid all but the most simple image related admin tasks and no-one seems to get hurt ;)
6. Decide what you want to offer the community by accepting the tools. If you have a good reason for wanting them - and you are not going to cause any harm - then you will get them. Nominating yourself as the "next step" in your Wikicareer is not a good reason for doing so.
7. Finally, be aware that the tools are essentially a license for other editors to give you crap. You simply can't use them without offending someone and the resulting attacks can be quite hurtful, and occasionally even alarming.

Let me know what you think, and if there is anything else I can assist you with. Rockpocket 02:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Its good to have something in mind you are particularly interested in, but its also important that you have a grasp of other things admins do, which is why its a good idea to get a little experience in the range of things admins do. I started off mainly with CSD too, as its always something that needs admin attention. You don't have to worry about knowing the particular criteria code (90% of them are A7 anyway), because you can always check the list when reviewing. Its not a problem having an opinion on things like list articles. The important thing is you understand our policies towards them and, even if you disagree with the policy, you are willing to uphold it. In some ways thats the toughest thing about being an admin, you have to separate your personal opinion on issues from what the Wikipedia consensus is. Let me know know your admin coach turns out to be and, as I said, feel free to drop by and ask a question anytime you choose. If I were you, I would consult with the admin coach about when he or she thinks it would be a good time for a nomination, and be sure to keep me informed as I would like to be involved.

Finally, let me say that it has been a pleasure having you as an adoptee and I look forward to continuing to work with you as a colleague! Rockpocket 03:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

One last thing, you can now have this box to do with as you please, congratulations:

This user has graduated from the adoption program by Rockpocket! Kudos!

Jeez. I just had a look at the admin coaching page, there is a huge backlog. Stick with it and, if you have no takers in a few weeks, I'll either try to drum up a volunteer or do some admin coaching myself (and there was you thinking you had seen the back of me!) In the meantime just keep getting that experience! Rockpocket 03:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

No, you can't be ungraduated! You are out and you are staying out!! You might wish to consider taking an adoptee of you own, though, I'm sure you would be a good mentor for a beginner. Its also a good way to get experience, as admins spent a fair amount of their time explaining how things work around here. Rockpocket 04:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

That is fine. You are welcome to express your opinion and that is a valid opinion. I expect he will be blocked again by someone per WP:SOCK#Circumventing policy. However, there are plenty of indef blocked editors who have known sockpuppets that are tolerated as long as they are editing constructively. Rockpocket 05:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] .

I havne't any problem users.But they accusing my country about genocide.They haven't any proof?You say them ,they don't accuse my country--Kızıl Şaman 09:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clearing something up

The only reason I deleted Kindsoul's source was because the same source cited the same information in the articles infobox.Hoponpop69 22:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Israeli film

As yet the page hasn't had development so things haven't developed. But when all the films are added the template will link decades together. Please see Template:Israelifilmlist now for the eventual idea ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 17:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin coaching

Hi there, saw your comments at Rockpocket's talk page. I'm willing to help out here where I can, but I don't do a great deal of admin tasks - I'm much more focussed on article writing. However, if you'd like to learn a bit about article assessment and reviewing, WP:GAC and WP:FAC in particular, I'd be happy to give you a few pointers with this. I'm also reasonably well-versed in the core policies, so should be able to help with any questions about that. Interested? Tim Vickers 16:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Daniel. I had the pleasure of interacting with Tim recently on animal testing and would strongly encourage you to accept his kind offer. It would be in your interest to get input from as many different admins as you can in the run up to a nomination. Rockpocket 19:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

That's very kind of you, Daniel. I really appreciate it. :-) SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Message

Hi, What about all of the pages which I have signed on? Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 22:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, yes I was going to do that, but I didnt like leaving all of the code behind. Oh well. Thanks anyway --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 22:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA suggestion

OK, it would be best to get some experience of the Good Article process first, since other Wikipedia article assessment processes are very similar, but just more in-depth or with a different focus. Let's do this from both sides. Take one of the spotlight articles you have worked on before and know a bit about - Oil spill or William I of England might be best since they are quite narrow and non-controversial topics - and nominate it as a Good article candidate. You should get a review (Pass/Fail/On hold) and perhaps suggestions for improvement within a week to a few days.

While you are waiting on that, pick a GA nominee that interests you from the GAC page and review it. Just put the #:{{GAReview}} ~~~~ template under the GAC, make your review on your own talk page and send me a note. I'll look through the article, read your review and see if there is anything I would add to the review and if I agree with your assessment. Sound OK? Tim Vickers 22:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expo 67 article is not Long

Hi there. I noticed you tagged Expo 67 as long on the Good Articles page, which is not correct. Although on first appearances, it does show that it is over 32K on Expo's history page. However, the Long tag only applies when you have factored out the footnotes and other links that are not readable prose. Check the following: Article Size guidelines method:

Specifically, for stylistic purposes, readable prose excludes: External links, Further reading, References, Footnotes, See also, and similar sections; Table of contents, tables, list-like sections, and similar content; and markup, interwiki links, URLs and similar formatting. To quickly estimate readable prose size, click on the printable version of the page, select all, copy, paste into an edit window, delete remaining items not counted in readable prose, and hit preview to see the page size warning.

If you actually copied the article into a new page -- and only readable prose as defined in the Article Size guidelines -- and then did a preview, you would see that in fact no size warning will pop up, meaning it is under 32K. That's why it is not considered long.--Abebenjoe 02:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William I of England

Hello, sorry it's taken a while but I've made a bunch of comments following my GA review on the talk page of the article. Feel free to let me know if I can help with any of the comments. All the best, The Rambling Man 14:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Negroid

I really appreciate that you are trying to help. But, I'm sorry to say that you are not helping. This article and the editors have a history, and of course someone coming in later and not having a judgment of the editors is a good thing. But, you are on an article talk that is controversial, scientific, and a term that is outdated and no longer used in science. I'm not telling you to not contribute to the discussion, but please understand what the article's content is, not what views are expressed by other editors. Insisting on an image, and agreeing with someone that says in German, this is what it says, which NOT what it is saying. Using Babel Fish is not a good way to translate old uses, let alone current. It's a help aid, sure, but it is not accurate either. The image, source, and caption is at best undue weight. Is not a good source for this controversial, outdated, potentially offensive term. Especially when the source is an another language. It's hard enough with sources in English to make sure the statements support the sources. I hope you take this as constructive, because that is my intent. Cheers. - Jeeny ^Talk 22:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Sorry for the long reply. Please see my talk page. Optakeover 03:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Righto

Haha, work in CS is a condradiction in terms :P See you around school then. David Fuchs ^(talk) 11:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

That is a good review of the article. It's major weaknesses are indeed over-short lead, lack of independent sourcing and some poor English. Of the three, the reliance on a single source is pretty serious, since that might cause serious bias in how the topic is approached. These are major historical events, at least a few more sources (and preferably some in English) need to be added. Tim Vickers 01:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

You can see now how GA review can give you useful experience. I wasn't expecting this to be so contentious though! Tim Vickers 23:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, how are things going? Tim Vickers 00:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kiev

Thanks for the note. The article is being somewhat expanded and may go through a little more more of WP:BRD. If the review can be put off for another week or so, I'd think the article would be stable.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  05:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Really, it all now depends on when User:Ipren is done with his promised expansion, and the rest of us is done reviewing it and we al reach a consensus version (it usually takes a day or two after he's done). So you may want to ask him when he is planning to finish it (or maybe he's done already).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  19:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mail

You have mail! Rockpocket 05:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!--Gheuf 05:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Kiev_Expedition_(1018)#Extended_hold

Hi. In going through the GAC report to tie up loose ends, I noticed that this articles hold has gone past seven days. I looked at the talk page and see that the article custodian, it appears, has extended the hold. If the article is unstable, it needs to be failed per criteria 5. Once he and/or others have made the necessary changes, it can be renominated at GAC, providing it is again stable. LaraLove♥ 13:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Scroll box

How do I get the scroll box to be centered on the page instead of being left justified, such as use on this page? -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I tried using center tags <center>{{scroll box ...}}</center>, but that centered the text within the scroll box as well. I tried putting center tags around only the brackets <center>{{</center>scroll box ...<center>}}</center>, , but that messed up the scroll box. If you have any other ideas, please let me know. Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 05:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I added the span info, but it didn't seem to left justify the text. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 05:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Review of Kiev Expedition (1018) for GA

The article has been stable for a week. What should I do to get it reviewed again?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cool app

Thought you might find this kinda cool. Rockpocket 06:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 03, 2007

[edit] User page

Hi, there seems to be a grammatical error in sentence two of your summary on your user page. Bearian 14:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oops

Don't know how that happened, but thankfully you're keeping an eye on it! Phgao 01:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I wonder

If you think that I wronged you during our discussions, as Tim suggests? I would certainly like to clear any misunderstandings we had that might have led to such a situation - although I am not sure if it is me or Tim that misunderstood something about that conversation.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  23:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for adminship

On this occasion, your request for adminship was not successful. I hope that you will continue your useful contributions to Wikipedia and may consider standing again in future. Warofdreams talk 02:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry I opposed, but thanks for the note. Keep up the good work, don't get wacked out, and see you back in a few months. Bearian 23:14, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: My RfA

You are welcome, and no worries for "ranting" about the rush issue as i did not consider it a rant, but instead a user who was standing their ground and defending themselves and i think that is a good thing. I think that you have proven that you would as an admin stand your ground (as you proved it in your RfA). I hope that you do give WP:AIV a try as it can further your experience with admin tasks, and if you have any questions regarding it i would be glad to help. Gain some more experience, and try again in a few months and i would be happy to vote support! Thanks again! Keep up the good work! Tiptoety 22:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Preity Zinta FA

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template help

Hi! I found you in Category:User template coder-c while looking for someone to help me on a template I created: (this one) If you know how, could you make the green strip containing "Basic statistics" and "Administration" optional? Thanks! --escondites 16:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Spotlight

Wikipedia:Spotlight, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spotlight and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Spotlight during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. I know that automated templates may seem a bit freaky, but let me tell you this: It's lovely to see such an effort for a Wikiproject like the spotlight, but it might be too similar to WP:ACID. ~Iceshark7 (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Awards Role Call

[edit] FanFiction.Net

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article FanFiction.Net, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of FanFiction.Net. Karanacs (talk) 19:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Spelling Error

I happened to be looking at you user page and it says "I have am amounted" not sure if that is intentional or the product of late night typing.....thought it would be weird to edit someone else's user page......still thought you should know...-Schrandit (talk) 17:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Adminship nomination

[edit] Spotlight

We should definitely get wikiproject spotlight back together. I'm telling the other coordinators. Mm40 (talk) 22:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm on the IRC for spotlight on the projct page. Come and we can talk. Mm40 (talk) 00:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spotlight

I'm restarting the spotlight project. You're listed as a project coordinator, and I wondered if you wanted to remain involved. Just drop me a line on my talk page...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 22:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)