User talk:MaxSem/Archive/October-November 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] define: inappropriate
Hello,
would you please be so kind to explain what is inappropriate concerning the links added? Is wikipedia not interested in having links to actual results and standings?
And please explain why you did an undo on the page "Football (soccer) around the world" I only added wikipedia internal references to some countries. And they where correct.
Please give a feedback.
--Tossa-fan 20:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- Our policy on external links is outlined here your additions violated several points, such as content language and possible conflict of interest. As of Football (soccer) around the world, yes my automatic revert without providing a reason was a mistake. Though a reason was pretty valid: that column was for top-level competitions only, not for lower leagues. MaxSem 13:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, the policy for external links is so far okay but the way is it lived seem strong to me. Fixtures and tables in sports competitions is for sure content which cannot be added directly to an article therefore an external reference would be an appropiate way to publish it. There are many other competitions where this is done exactly that way and you even deleted all references in articles where no one link was before.
Regarding Football (soccer) around the world I must state that there are many entries for many countries which refer to more than the topmost competition, e.g. Austria which refers even third level. All links I added where second level and I am of the opinion that this is of interest for many people.
Best regards, --Tossa-fan 15:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Block avoidance
You had indef. blocked User:Migssant/User:Migssant19 back in April due to image abuse and copyvio. Just letting you know that I'm pretty sure the user has returned in the form of Lacreta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log). Except for non-free logos and one image up at PUI, it is plausible that the rest of the images this user has uploaded are his own work. I'm just writing to let you know since you were the blocking admin. -Andrew c [talk] 02:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll keep an eye on him. MaxSem 09:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AWB error handling
I partially reverted your change that you made to ErrorHandler.cs in rev 1767. The user-friendly message about invalid regular expression should appear only in case of ArgumentException specifically, not its subclasses. We still want to offer a bug report in case of ArgumentNullException or ArgumentOutOfRangeException that may happen when performing general fixes. Regards, Jogers (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. MaxSem 09:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non-existant AN/I entry
Hi there, you just referenced a conversation about an AfD that doesn't appear to exist. Please re-check your contributions, your edit may not have been saved if you tried posting to AN/I.- CHAIRBOY (☎) 20:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- Gah, it was on AN. Thanks, I'll fix it. MaxSem 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of Jennifer Moore
I have listed this deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_October_21#Jennifer_Moore. John254 23:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of Marion van de Wetering
Please note that Dominic J. Solntseff (talk · contribs) has nominated an article you deleted in an AFD for Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thanks. Camaron1 | Chris 19:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DRV Notice
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Marion van de Wetering. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.--- Jreferee t/c 15:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AWB: Mgmbot
You commented on another request, but you didn't commented on mine. Do you have a moment to look at it and approve my bot, so I can run the trial? - Mgm|(talk) 12:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Done. MaxSem 12:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Protection conflicts
[1]. :) Acalamari 18:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- ROFL :D MaxSem 18:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AWB removal
I wish to have my user access remove from AWB, as it appears to be too complicated to my scope of understanding. I may reapply in a few months time, but in the meantime I will make spelling corrections manually. Hope its OK. PrestonH 21:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- As you wish. MaxSem 21:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Careful
Oops, I've reverted those two edits. While I had 'filter out non mainspace' checked, the AWB behaviour in these circumstances is IMHO incomplete. I've filed an AWB bug report for consideration. Thanks Rjwilmsi 19:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikifunctions
Thank you. I found GetText a few days ago to do exactly what I hoped it might. And thank you for the suggestions for alternative functions elsewhere. GetText will do nicely for now. It may be a while until I trust a fully automatic bot. For now, for it to look and lear will do nicely. DanielDemaret 11:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yesterdays Release
Hi Max, Did you put a "debug" version of AWB out for release, rather than a "release" version out? As it would seem to be that way, however, it doesnt fix the null exception error...
Reedy Boy 13:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Checked out last release code. That gives the same error. Martins got a hunch it may have been some MS update.. So i'm gonna try it on another machine Reedy Boy 19:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Damn, I suck. Good that you've managed to fix this. MaxSem 17:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lol. I just dont get how a debug caused so many problems. Yes, the updater one and the profiler are to be expected (the latter if someones using 2 versions simultaneously).. But why the wikidiff one?? Mines still not diffing (but that may be 64bit vista...)Reedy Boy 19:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- I still can't reproduce it. Did you try to use Wikidiff2.dll from earlier releases? MaxSem(Han shot first!) 07:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- No... But since the update, it isnt giving me the message everyone else got.. Just that one that i reported yesterday - [[]]. Seems there are quite a few people didnt get the error.. Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#An_attempt_was_made_to_load_a_program_with_an_incorrect_format._.28Exception_from_HRESULT:_0x8007000B.29 Reedy Boy 09:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- I still can't reproduce it. Did you try to use Wikidiff2.dll from earlier releases? MaxSem(Han shot first!) 07:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I owe you
More for A. B. (I hope) than anything else though the vote is appreciated - I only afraid he will accept when I'm offline!. However - I after him as a Meta admin in time - he probably knows more about Meta and has higher contribs there than quite a few of the current admins! Cheers --Herby talk thyme 19:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- =) MaxSem(Han shot first!) 19:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WP:RFBOT
Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. —Preceding unsigned comment added by E (talk • contribs)
- Thanks. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 22:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] newb apology/request
Hi, you recently removed a request for a delete i put on Drug use in Australia, saying I was not the author. The article doesnt show me as the author, even tho I started the article, must be a wikiblip. Can you tell me the correct delete tag to put on an article that has been moved/renamed, turned into an auto-forwarding page and only has bot logs linking to it? I've looked high and low, i'm lost in wikihelp... rakkar 08:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
- Your not the creator of Drug use in Australia, as it has been moved, and then a new page re-created in its absense. Illicit drug use in Australia shows you as the author. Its now a redirect, but you can mark it with speedy deletion. Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects
- There are 3 main reasons for deleting redirects, redirecting to non-existant pages, cross namespace redirects, and also "implausible typo's". But it doesnt really fall under any of those categories, and its current redirection location, to me, would seem right! —Reedy Boy 13:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
I wondered about not spamming talk pages but in the end it isn't me to not say thanks. The support (& elsewhere!) is appreciated - cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Silly Monobook errors
Fairly easy to "fix", or at least, not harrass the user over the matter...
Whats your opinion? Option to supress it, especially for users such as Rich Farnborough, would make sense to me...
—Reedy Boy 16:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- It's probably related to network failures when page head is not fully received and therefore all GetScriptingVar return empty string. I'll change it to check for cologne blue instead of absence of monobook. BTW, I just encountered that crappy diff bug: after I stated AWB it screamed that it's not recent version, when I ignored it and started editing it displayed the error you've already seen, but on second attempt it diffed without any problems. Strange thing. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 19:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of IAHGames article on Hellgate Lodnon
Extrakun 07:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC) Hi, your deletion log says "definitely not for Wikipedia". May I understand what do you mean by that? The article reports facts and a progress of events, which are not fictional and in keeping with the other company history like Apples and Microsoft. Is there a better way to represent the information? The account which was reflected in the article was even reported in summary in the national newspaper.
- By "definitely not for Wikipedia" I mean that the page was a news entry rather than an encyclopedic article (see what Wikipedia is not). However, it fits nicely in Wikinews' inclusion criteria, as it seems to me. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 08:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Equipment reservation policies
Hi Max, The author who created Equipment reservation policies has commented on its speedy deletion on my talk page as I tagged it for speedy deletion per A1. Could you comment as you deleted the tagged article and presumably have access to its history and content? Thanks. -- Toddst1 (talk) 16:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] RfA for Canadian Paul
 |
Four years ago this day, a foreigner was voted by the community to serve a land that he loved. Today, a new foreigner humbly accepts the charge and support of serving a community that he loves. Hopefully, he won't disappoint. Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of (47/0/1). The trust bestowed upon me by the community is one of the most touching honours that I have ever received, and I vow not to let you down. Whether you have suggestions for ways in which I could improve, a request for assistance or just need someone to listen, my talk page and my email are always open. I pledge to do what I can to help this project, in the words of a man who needs no introduction, "make the internet not suck." A special thank you goes out to Tim Vickers for nominating me. Cheers, CP 22:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC) |
[edit] My RfA
Hi; thanks for your support to my RfA, which closed successfully at (51/1/2). I'll keep this brief since I don't like spamming anyone: I'll work hard to deserve the trust you placed in me. Thanks again. — Coren (talk) 23:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] James I of England
You protected the article in the version that was not agreed upon by consensus, but rather the version that the only 2 edit warring unilaterally wish to have. I suggest you look at the article and read thew talk page before you protect this version. Regards, Jeffpw (talk) 08:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- I protected it on The Wrong Version, exactly as it should be done in cases of edit wars. Reverts are not methods of establishing consensus, whattever it may be. Please let's continue the discussion at ANI. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 08:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Now how in the world did I know that would be your reply???:-s As I said, if you had read the talk page before you protected, you would see there was a consensus version. Wikipedia is all about consensus, isn't it? Whatever, I'm too irritated to discuss this with you further at this point. Jeffpw (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, had you actually bothered to look into the situation before you protected the article, you would have seen that there were up to three sockpuppets disrupting the article and its talkpage discussion. The situation has now been resolved with the help of two other administrators. Jeffpw (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Jeff, you should have filed a checkuser case if you suspected sockpuppetry. Admins don't have magic pixie dust that allows them to spot sockpuppets. What MaxSem did what absolutely correct. Carcharoth (talk) 05:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I pointed out in the ANI discussion that one user had a history of sockpuppets, and that I saw collusion. No action was taken until I directly approached 2 other admins with the situation. As to your rather uncivil, sarcastic snipe about "pixie dust", am I expected to do everything? I brought an admin problem to the admin board, where I was pretty much given the brushoff. Your input in my conversation with MAxSem is not helpful, and you are at best tangentially involved. Jeffpw (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I see the comment now. It wasn't your initial post, but your reply later, where you update the situation and say "talk page littered with 3rr and sockpuppet discussions". Admins don't have checkuser access, and still have to file a case, as seen here. I was under the impression that you thought admins carry out checkuser requests, and thought I should correct that. Apologies for jumping into the conversation uninvited. Carcharoth (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- I pointed out in the ANI discussion that one user had a history of sockpuppets, and that I saw collusion. No action was taken until I directly approached 2 other admins with the situation. As to your rather uncivil, sarcastic snipe about "pixie dust", am I expected to do everything? I brought an admin problem to the admin board, where I was pretty much given the brushoff. Your input in my conversation with MAxSem is not helpful, and you are at best tangentially involved. Jeffpw (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Jeff, you should have filed a checkuser case if you suspected sockpuppetry. Admins don't have magic pixie dust that allows them to spot sockpuppets. What MaxSem did what absolutely correct. Carcharoth (talk) 05:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, had you actually bothered to look into the situation before you protected the article, you would have seen that there were up to three sockpuppets disrupting the article and its talkpage discussion. The situation has now been resolved with the help of two other administrators. Jeffpw (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Now how in the world did I know that would be your reply???:-s As I said, if you had read the talk page before you protected, you would see there was a consensus version. Wikipedia is all about consensus, isn't it? Whatever, I'm too irritated to discuss this with you further at this point. Jeffpw (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Your bot request
Hi MaxSem I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RoboMaxCyberSem 2 has been approved. Please visit the above link for more information. Thanks! BAGBot (talk) 13:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AWB Improvements
Hi Max, I seem to remember when you were speeding up AWB, that you saying to check if there were matches for things, and then only doing the replace if this was the case..?
rev 1853 - Like that?
—Reedy Boy 19:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's a good approach, however it's really important either when working with long strings (article text or a significant part of it), or when working with lots of short strings, not every of which needs a replace. That is, in this particular case its effect will be noticeable only when pasting huge lists of articles. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 11:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: user talk page warning
I saw that they had incorrectly created their monobook in the mainspace, saw that it had been properly moved to userspace, and requested the old link be deleted as a test page. I replaced twinkle's templated test page deletion notification per your suggestion. Hope this helps, not a case of newbie biting just good ol' cleanup! ~Eliz81(C) 21:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Email
Fired you one. Cheers, Daniel 07:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Bah, it seems my guess was right (I saw the "Online" bar). The email is probably redundant :) Daniel 07:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nazism
Having upheld banning me for 24 hours for edit warring on Nazism, I assume that in fairness you will now place the same sanction on User:Vision_Thing and User:EliasAlucard.--Cberlet (talk) 14:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Several no's: you was blocked, not banned. 'Ban' is a different thing in Wikipedia. And blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punitive, that's why your request to issue a block more than two days after the edit war ended cannot be fulfilled. I understand, you feel you was treated unfairly, but I'm just an administrator who noticed an unblock request, checked that the block was issued in accordance with policies, namely WP:EW, determined that your unblock request did not provide a valid reasoning and therefore declined it. Take this matter to sysop who blocked you, I can't help there, and I'm unfamiliar with the story around this article. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 19:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Snowballing RfAs
If you're going to close RfAs early like you did to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Goodshoped35110s 2 (which, for the record, I whole-heartedly agree with), could you look over the instructions at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Promotions (or my cheat-sheet at User:EVula/admin#RfA closure)? Closed RfAs need to be added to be added to Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies, not just tagged with templates and removed from WP:RFA. Thanks! EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Aghhh, my bad. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 19:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] MediaWiki:Edittools
Привет!!! Я видел, что ты полседний раз редактировал MediaWiki:Edittools. Не можешь что либо сделать по моему запросу на MediaWiki talk:Edittools, в частности по первому пункту, ну и возможно по второму. Зарангее спасибо! --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 20:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Я, честно говоря, столько много без обсуждения побаиваюсь добавлять. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 20:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Да, согласен, могут не понять... но ведь и обсужать не хотят... Может пока ударение и самый первый блок, лдаже не весь, а с казахскими и татарскими буквами: ӘәӨөҒғҖҗҚқҢңҮүҰұҲҳҺһ. Азербайджанскую кириллицу убрал за ненадобностью. Но это вроде не много. Там полюбому за одну строчку вылазит, а вторая практически пустая... --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 13:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AWB : report bug from www.wikimanche.fr
Hello.
On Wikimanche, I didn't try to replace or modify any image on the page. I was testing a typo replacement, cycling through all pages and it came with this bug so I did a report (copy/paste). After this bug, AWB always proposed me to replace the tag [[Image:Exemple.jpg]] by [[juin:Exemple.jpg]] and I don't know why... Draky 20:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've already noticed and fixed the juin bug (it was caused by an update in MediaWiki), and now I got it that you simply set the images combobox to 'remove image', but didn't enter an image to delete. Fixed. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 20:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, can you help me here : Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs, I'm fr:User:Stef48, i need AWB for a new portal : the filmmaking on wikipedia fr, and, i've a bug ... Can you ask me here : fr:user talk:stef48. Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stef4854 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration Elections
Hi there, I noticed that you oppposed my candidacy for the arbitration committee on the basis that I was a checkuser ombudsperson, and that this would create a conflict of interest. I wouldn't normally question an oppose vote, but I'm a bit confused about this, since I stated in my candidate statement that I would step down if it was felt that it would be a COI. Rebecca 10:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Right, I've missed this part somehow. Oppose withdrawn. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 10:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] hello
thx very much to unblock my ip adress, i didn't do anything i thing mu ip used by another one..thx again. --Osamahw 18:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
