User talk:Mackensen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No
Solicitation
Mackensenarchiv
- /Archive (August 2003–April 2004)
- /Archive (April 2004–November 2004)
- /Archive (November 2004–February 2005)
- /Archive (February 2005–May 2005)
- /Archive (May 2005–August 2005)
- /Archive (August 2005–December 2005)
- /Archive (December 2005–February 2006)
- /Archive (February 2006–April 2006)
- /Archive (April 2006–May 2006)
- /Archive (May 2006–July 2006)
- /Archive (July 2006–October 2006)
- /Archive (October 2006–January 2007)
- /Archive (January 2007–June 2007)
- /Archive (June 2007–August 2007)
- /Archive (August 2007–January 2008
- /Archive (January 2008–present)
Spammers: I would like for this page to stay reasonably clean. If you have business with me, feel free to leave a comment, else please move on. Please ignore the gigantic eye in the corner with the pump-action shotgun.
Unsigned messages will be ignored. You can sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~). I reserve the right to disruptively eliminate gigantic blobs of wiki-markup from signatures on a whim if I think they're cluttering up my talk page.
[edit] Not vandalism
Gene Ray really IRL died. 24.147.52.110 (talk) 22:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Docs please. Mackensen (talk) 22:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] g'day mack....
I've got a quick question for the checkuser ombuds folk that I hope you can help me with (you'll probably recall the emails I've sent over the last few months, and I also piped up here and here! Hopefully it's not too big a deal to sort out...
I was wondering if the ombudsman commission has any opinion as to the propriety of an individual checkuser telling an editor (me!) when they have been checked, by whom, and for what rationale.
I have understood that the commission is not minded to instruct the release of such information, but I'm wondering if that implies a general restriction or not.
I popped a note on rebecca's talk page also - but hope you don't mind me coming here too... thanks! Privatemusings (talk) 00:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] In answer to your question
Yes, there is a uniform.... Risker (talk) 04:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- I call Conrad! Mackensen (talk) 04:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Seriously, Conrad was the king of cool. Crazy fighter-jock, third man on the moon, and died in a horrible motorcycle accident. Tom Wolfe was all over him in The Right Stuff. Pity that part of the book didn't make it into the movie...Mackensen (talk) 04:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Ah yes! My goodness, it's been 25 years since I read that book. I'll have to spring it from the library when I return the stack about hockey goaltenders I got out for an article. Wolfe will no doubt be much more interesting. Well, except for the Ken Dryden book. Risker (talk) 04:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:C2c color
A tag has been placed on Template:C2c color requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:C2c lines
A tag has been placed on Template:C2c lines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:C2c stations
A tag has been placed on Template:C2c stations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shii/ED
The relevant DRV is over. See [1]. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Noted. The context has changed; a completely new MfD might make more sense then re-opening the old one. Mackensen (talk) 10:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
It appears that Guy IARed it away anyways. JoshuaZ (talk) 17:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gerald Grosvenor, 6th Duke of Westminster
One of the prostitutes says he tried to haggle over the price — he has $14 billion! Such haggling would be the true pathology of the whole thing! El_C 16:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Feedback on draft requested - User:Lawrence Cohen/Arbitration RFC draft
Hi, if you have a moment, would you mind reviewing User:Lawrence Cohen/Arbitration RFC draft? I'm just beginning to draft this, but given the recent situations I think this could be valuable to see what community mandates if any exist for changes the Arbitration Committee could be required to accept. My intention was to keep the RFC format exceptionally simple, with a very limited number of "top level" sections that were fairly precise. Please leave any feedback on User talk:Lawrence Cohen/Arbitration RFC draft. Thanks. Lawrence § t/e 17:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Central Trains lines
A tag has been placed on Template:Central Trains lines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Central Trains stations
A tag has been placed on Template:Central Trains stations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Infobox Station Header CTA
Hi. Something is wrong with this template--the images are appearing full size on the station pages. I had a look but I don't know the code well enough to be able to fix it. Can you take a look at it. Thanks —Jeremy (talk) 01:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. Strange that that should suddenly start causing a problem. —Jeremy (talk) 02:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] DYK
--Wizardman 04:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Mackensen (talk) 12:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bot Blocking
Thanks, i think...
Lol
I cant believe how bad the categorisation seems to be. It shouldnt be unreasonable to suspect 99.9% of articles in a category and any subcategories are actually related...
Ahh well
—Reedy Boy 18:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks!
Thanks heaps for your response on the checkuser thing, Mackensen - and I'm very pleased that my question has been addressed (I've received other responses privately too - which is great - I'll try and bring something together before too long....). More than one checkuser indicated to me that this was a policy question about which they were unsure - and I think the key bit here really is "it's up to the checkuser in question to make whatever disclosures he or she deems necessary or proper" - which tallies with what I perceive as practice.
To be very clear - it is my understanding therefore that if an individual checkuser wishes to inform an editor about any checks run on an account, including details of rationales given, the identity of the checkuser, and the date / time of the check, then that would not be prohibited by the privacy policy - but a strong reason would be required to overcome the expectation that all checkuser information be kept as private as possible.
Thanks once again for engaging - and would it be ok with you to copy your comments to a centralised location for discussion at some point? - I think that would be useful! - cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Farhill Transport, 14th Mar 1939.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Farhill Transport, 14th Mar 1939.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] No content in Category:Amtrak stations in the District of Columbia
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Amtrak stations in the District of Columbia, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Amtrak stations in the District of Columbia has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Amtrak stations in the District of Columbia, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 4/29 DYK
--Bedford 09:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] G'day Mack.....
I saw your recent thoughtful post about how your roles within wikipedia have changed over the last 5 years - and that you're now back full circle to straight forward article editing - it struck me that not only am I very interested to talk about your experiences, but that others may be interested in having a listen - I wonder if you might consider sparing an hour or so at some point convenient to you to have a sort of interview / conversation about your wiki experience 'in the whole' - which I'd really like to then 'broadcast' as one of the 'Not The Wikipedia Weekly' podcasts? - If you've any questions at all, please do let me know, and I hope you might be agreeable to a friendly, open chat - which I think would be very useful to many in the community... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 03:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds fascinating, but at the moment I must turn you down--I don't use Skype and I lack the necessary kit anyway. Otherwise I'd be more than willing to do it. Best, Mackensen (talk) 10:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- no worries - and with sincere apologies if you were politely declining to preserve my dignity, it is with some trepidation that I let you know that we could actually have a chat via either a dial in, or dial out service (basically, I can call you, or you can call a specific number if you prefer) - so the only really necessary kit is the willingness to spare an hour or so, and a functional telephone! Let me know if that helps any - and of course feel free to decline - I do feel that your insights gained from a long and multi-faceted wiki career, and your take on the wiki in general would be of interest to many (and by many, I guess I certainly mean me!) - cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 11:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] temporary inactive / reserve list
I noticed your addition of a temporary inactive list to the MiLB roster temp. I think MiLB uses the terms "temporary inactive list" and "reserve list" interchangeably. If you'll look at the PCL's transactions list ([2]), you'll see that Laynce Nix was placed on the "temporary inactive list" on May 6. Now, if you check his team's roster ([3]) you'll see his status as "reserve". It seems like "t.i.l." may be the official designation, but they use "reserve" on the roster because it fits better into the allotted space. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 17:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, I wasn't sure about that. How about keeping the double-cross symbol (‡), but calling it reserve? Mackensen (talk) 17:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- That sounds fine to me. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 17:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Champion (passenger train)
--BorgQueen (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 5/11 DYK
--Bedford 21:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Vicki Iseman DRV
Very well done and well stated in that close sir. I haven't been editing much or keeping track of DRV lately. I just noticed that May seems to be the month for returning to major DRV controversies I have previously closed. ED, Vicki Iseman, Corey Delaney. Fun times... IronGargoyle (talk) 20:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks very much
Mackensen, what can I say? Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I've always held your opinion in high esteem, and to see your name in the "support" column meant a great deal to me. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- You're more than welcome; I hope I haven't helped condemn you to cycle of burnout and regret. Mackensen (talk) 16:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Amtrak lines and route templates
Hi Mackensen. We seem tyo have gotten into a mini edit war (edit skirmish?) about Amtrak route templates. The reason why I moved the route maps from outside the infobox is that they don't display correctly when inside it. It ends up with gaps between each line segment. I'm not quite sure why... I think it may to be something to do with the infobox template. Tompw (talk) (review) 16:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I see about three gaps on Pacific Surfliner even now; I'd rather an integrated infobox because the simplifies page display. I don't recall seeing any when they were unified. What browser are you using? Mackensen (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, I would rather have an integrated infobox too, but not at the expense of the overall apearence. I use the latest version of Internet Explorer, like most users, and I get gaps between every single line segment. Tompw (talk) (review) 17:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I can reproduce it in IE 6; both Firefox and Opera render the page correctly. Mackensen (talk) 17:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, I would rather have an integrated infobox too, but not at the expense of the overall apearence. I use the latest version of Internet Explorer, like most users, and I get gaps between every single line segment. Tompw (talk) (review) 17:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Lord derby.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Lord derby.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? BlueAzure (talk) 22:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Email
FYI, sent you an email. JoshuaZ (talk) 03:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Caprock Chief
--BorgQueen (talk) 10:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Chetniks
Mackensen, I'd like to go forward with the general cleanup of the article. I wonder if I could rush a resolution to this matter? The "irrelevance" and "not a proof" justifications Deucaon keeps repeating are clearly not valid in this case, as they do not address the matter at hand. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hate to annoy you with this thing again, but User:Deucaon is in all objectivity not really discussing, nor has he yet stated any real reason for his actions. I would let the thing run its course, but like I said its just that I'd really like to start the cleanup while I still have time (I'm generally working on the cleanup of WW2 Yugoslav articles). As for Chetnik collaboration, I can't imagine how POV a source would have to be to actually state the Chetniks did not collaborate with the Axis. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Railway station naming consistency
Hey Mackensen - how is your plan on railway station renaming going? Just to clarify, in Australia we use "X railway station, City" where the line is part of a suburban system and "X railway station, State" where it is not. So Dulwich Hill railway station, Sydney for a station in suburban Sydney, and Greta railway station, New South Wales for a country station. I think this works well. Alternatively you could just do "X railway station" and disambiguate where necessary - that's where the Australian and English systems differ. In Australia there are stations with the same name in three different cities (and I imagine America would have the same problem) so it might be better taking our example.
The only exceptions are ones with proper names which are iconic - Southern Cross Station is the title, for example, with the usual name a redirect. Grand Central Terminal or similar I expect would be given the same treatment.
How's the Sydney infoboxes by the way? Any way forward on them? JRG (talk) 09:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- You can reply here. JRG (talk) 00:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Ahem... JRG (talk) 12:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not ignoring you, I just had to get the styles issue settled (or out of mind) first. The only limitation is that we never quite agreed, or I never quite understood, the railway structure in central Sydney. Otherwise I think things are ready. Mackensen (talk) 12:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- User:Mackensen/Flarp updated again. I think we were close. Mackensen (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] So...how are the trains doing?
I'll bet that at times like this, you're genuinely glad your RfB turned out the way it did. Risker (talk) 22:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- The trains still run on time. Ye Gods, what a nightmarish RfA. I realized just how detached I've gotten from the en community when the opposers were all referencing controversies I'd never heard of! Thank heavens for that. How's adminship treating you? Mackensen (talk) 23:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I've managed not to blow up anything so far, although I am sure some people would consider that evidence that I lack initiative. Been too busy in RL to spend much time online, unfortunately; today's the first chance I've had to return to my real love, copy editing. (I know. That sounds sort of twisted.) Some of those controversies left me a bit baffled too, which I found oddly reassuring. Risker (talk) 02:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Revert
I reverted your edits to the Bio guideline re. the status of Sir/Dame. The argument has been made on talk that the guideline has been discussed extensively previously so should not be elevated to status of title vs. an honorific until there is consensus to change. Ripe (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- As you like. It makes no material difference. Mackensen (talk) 23:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Article you deleted
Is it possible to see the content of an article you deleted some time ago? Namely: Queen's University street parties Thank you 06:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)~
- The deleted revisions still exist, so any of the administrators in this category should be able to provide you with a copy of the article. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 13:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] {{s-rail}}
Hi, thanks for your recent posts at WT:RAIL. I think we should be able to get {{s-rail}} to work on UK station articles. One thing that is a disadvantage of having general-purpose options is that certain editors may use them to such an extent that the boxes become as cluttered as the {{rail line}} boxes can get now (with comments such as "not Sundays", "Summer only" and so on). Perhaps if these options were restricted it would help maintain some sort of order? --RFBailey (talk) 01:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- There's not much stopping them regardless; there are various ways to game the branch/route parameter as well, but with the potential to really mess up the backend. The benefit of the general-purpose field is that it has no wider utility. Restricting it on s-line itself isn't really an option--too many other projects rely on the template. We could restrict what's passed by {{s-rail-national}}, but that would require a wider discussion; you'd also face the possibility of people using s-line instead to get around it. Ultimately, I think the best option is to establish a standard for what boxes display (as with the services/lines issue) and enforce that, instead of a technical arms race. Mackensen (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's true, but gaming those parameters requires a certain amount of ingenuity, which restricts the amount of meddling people might do with it. We have tried to reach consensus before, but haven't been able to reach an agreement. --RFBailey (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, we can go ahead with a whitelist in the manner I described, but there should probably be a parallel discussion about the scope of the boxes. My main concern is that it shouldn't stand in the way of rollout. Mackensen (talk) 02:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's true, but gaming those parameters requires a certain amount of ingenuity, which restricts the amount of meddling people might do with it. We have tried to reach consensus before, but haven't been able to reach an agreement. --RFBailey (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)