User talk:OhanaUnited/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

IRC

To register and get in to wikipedia-en-admins:

First go here and join en-wikipedia.
Next add this message to the tab labeled "info":
/msg nickserv register [password]
(but don't forget to replace [password] with a password)
Finally go here and request access.

And you're done! Malinaccier (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I saw. Happy editing, Malinaccier (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost

This one is late for a variety of reasons. It'll publish within the next few hours. Ral315 (talk) 03:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Darrell S. Cole

I wanted to ask you a follow-up quesion about the comment you left on this article. Each paragraph at least has a citation and most of the citations point to the same 2 or 3 references. I used those same 3 or 4 references as sources for the article (or at least the portions I did). Are you saying you want me to sprinkle the article with the same references so that more facts have inline citations or that I need to find more references?--Kumioko (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter

The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Fetured portal

I found your words interesting:

“ GA have gone a long way and the bar raised over the years. Originally, if anyone thinks it's good, it's GA. Now there is a criteria that can be measured against. ”

Yet at featured portal the criteria are trumped by anyone who thinks "it's good" or bad. Surely you recoginse this disconnect. -- Secisek (talk) 00:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice newsletter

Kudos to you and Dr.Cash for a great WPGA newsletter. Best --Eustress (talk) 01:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 05:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverting closing

I'm really quite surprised that you reverted the starting of my process of closing debate at GA. I don't expect that anything would change in the next few days and the meta-debates going on seem counter-productive. There are no hard and fast rules about when a debate should close. As I just spent the last two hours writing an opinion and I'm way past my bedtime, I'm not going to do anything for another day. If I see no positive discussion happening when I return, I am going to close. I hope this will be alright with you. Goodnight. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 09:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I was also a bit surprised by this revert. Such a reversion should only be done if there is a clear benefit; I don't see such a benefit here. I do sympathise that you got a bit caught up in the unfortunate "Shut down?" thread, but that is an example of the kind of meta-debate that takes us away from finding consensus and into the territory of arguing about it. Geometry guy 14:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Anyone sitting on the fence will probably not have anything to say that would change the outcome. I never count !votes, and only consider the strength of arguments. I'll close when I have a chance. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 02:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Earth sciences

hey dude, i have addressed your comments! Sushant gupta (talk) 12:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term

Thank you for your comment at m:American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term. As I do not yet use Wikispecies, I have never intended to leave that out of my prepared petition. As the current live petition is not popular enough, I have added Wikispecies to my proposed shortened petition and I hope to open it to signatories around 1 June 2008. Your comment is important to improve my proposed shortened petition before opening, so thank you again.--Jusjih (talk) 01:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Philosopher

Please respond to me there. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 03:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I also look forward to your response. GlassCobra 07:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

drat

I did a bunch of editorial cleanup of the sister projects interview, but there was an edit conflict -- oh well.  ;-) Good interview. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 11:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Environmental Record Project

Hey Cyrus, my environmental record section I made on the John McCain page was moved to the environmental issues section in the political policy subheading. I responded to the user suggesting the page have an environmental record section all its own. I haven't heard back yet but I wanted to hear your thoughts on what I should do. Thanks, wbecker9 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wbecker9 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the confusion the post about the environmental record was intended for someone else's talk page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wbecker9 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Darrell S. Cole

I have added a lot to this article based on your comments. Could you please take another look at it and let me know if there is anything else that needs refining?--Kumioko (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

GA sweeps

I'd like to offer to help with the GA sweeps.

I won't be at all offended though if for whatever reason I'm not considered suitable. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Good Article Sweeps

I'd like to offer my assistance in the GA sweeps. Most of my GA reviewing experience has come in the form of Television episodes, but I'm pretty familiar with the entire process. If you'd like me to help, I can always be reached at my talk page. Mastrchf (t/c) 22:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well I might not be what you're looking for. As I said earlier, all of my work has come in the form of reviewing television episodes, and the five that I've reviewed, I've eventually passed. I guess that I've just been lucky in reviewing episodes that all had relatively good work prior to nom, and the nominator quickly introduced my suggestions to the article. So, I can't give you any true articles that I've failed. I completely understand if this, for lack of a better word disqualifies me from the procedure, but if you'd still like my help, particularly in the category of television episodes (which at last count looks to be around 136 articles), some of my reviews have been The Economist (Lost) and Pilot (30 Rock). Mastrchf (t/c) 12:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Natures Pics

Hi OhanaUnited,
Sorry but can't recall of the top of my head an don't have time to chase it up at the moment - it would have been in galleries before 2006 judging by my upload date. Good luck with it, --Fir0002 07:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: GA Sweeps

Hey. One failed article that I reviewed was Westminster Christian Academy (Missouri). The review is still available on the talk page. One passed article that I reviewed was Arlington Senior High School. The review is archived via the article history header. will381796 (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks. And just for the record, the review for Arlington can be found here. I don't know who or what moved it to a subpage but it's there. will381796 (talk) 11:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment

I compled your challance at [1]]!!! I added Al Gore to Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment. --Megapen (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Food Portal

I am a college instructor, I am in the middle of administering finals and compiling grades for my classes, this semester has been hectic as well with a number of issues as-well-as myself working on my thesis so I haven't had time to update the portal monthly which is why I changed to the monthly random portal generator. I should have some time this weekend to update the news and DYK items however and maybe add some new articles to the random portal generator pages.--Chef Tanner (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocking User:Plate King

User:Plate King was on our user manipulaton list and we are glad you blocked him. Our IP spoofer is working really well. We can also tell you that we are not really spottedogsdotorg, since that person was proven by us to be Scott Brown, a mentally ill person in Pennsylvania who tried killed himself earlier this year and has been placed in a secure facility for the indefinite future. We had a bit of fun and tried to imitate him and see how many people we could get caught up in bans thinking they were Mr. Brown. We should add that Mr. Brown was brilliant in his attack stratergy of blaming someone else, especially someone he had issues with, and the work of this idiot savant seemed brilliant and if taken to the next level by someone with actual brains and technical know how it could be a way to destroy Wikipedia from within.

Our true target for banning is actually Bradley aka User:Qqqqqq. We have posted his address and e-mail earlier and will again in the future. See, our goal is to get good Wikipedia editors to go away, so killing off User:Plate King just furthers our agenda of destruction from within. So it is nothing personal against Bradley, it is just that we are trying to thin the Wikipedia user pool one user at a time. Oh, we also have an admin account, but we aren't going to tell you who that is since that would be telling. That, of course, we use to get our info for our IP spoofer and other things which we shall not get into, such as the deleted mad ramblings of Mr. Brown. We are not stupid enough to use it to actually go and ban people, since that would be dirty pool. We shall tell you that you have made us very happy in banning one of our current character's accounts, for those of you in Rio Linda it is User:Libro0. (Yes, we just gave you a clue as to our real identity if you are collecting clues as to who we really are.) We want you to catch us and ban us, but the game of cat and mouse, pretending to be others, social engineering passwords, pissing off users is too fun. Of course we are using "we" since User:Plate King used it and we want you to think we are actually him or is it actually because there is more than one of us doing it? Which one is true? Both? One? Neither? Playing with your little minds is oh so fun and oh so easy. Plus TOR is a really brilliant thing. It is much easier than slogging about and finding open proxies, but that is not to say that we still do not use them. So yes, this was written from a TOR node, so go ahead and block it. Who knows, one of our alter egos may just go and do that. You do not know the half of our trail of destruction! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.45.180 (talk) 03:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The user above has continued to place accusations about me in several places like the one above is also here. He has also gone back and replaced an accusation here User:Omero Tognon. I want to ignore him and have him ignore me but from the looks of those disturbing passages he has written I had to have my user page protected. I was considering putting up a suspected sock puppet case for his current set of socks User:Box Benefits, User:Omero Tognon, User:I Hate CAPTCHAS,User:Baseball Card Guy, User:Bbcardguy, User:Yuck_Flu_By_Road. I would rather stay out of it and continue to edit unbothered since it seems blocking him has achieved little considering he is connected to several previous cases. Plus the fact that it is tiresome. He has also been using anonymous socks as well: 85.178.49.95, 85.177.45.180, 218.25.101.173, 121.44.172.11 I went to the Village Pump(policy) page to introduce some countermeasure to sock puppets but it appears to be an unpopular idea. Libro0 (talk) 19:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Plate King

Yep - Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Bolly_Nickers links to a positive checkuser result to a whole drawful of socks of spotteddogdotorg, of which this was one. GBT/C 07:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't share your surprise - it's an SPA that's clearly familiar with wikispeak from the outset. There's still something a bit fishy going on with a couple of other accounts, but I'm looking into it. The public face of GBT/C 12:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Will you please check that I'm doing it right?

Well, I picked a category, and I've just finished the review of Leonardo da Vinci. I've updated the oldid as the instructions said, and left a message on the talk page. Is there anything else I need to do before moving on?

I'm a bit puzzled as well as to why there are three separate sections in the sweeplist for:

  • Last references sweep:
  • Last image tags sweep:
  • Last article quality sweep:

Shouldn't all of those things be checked during the review of each article? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Basilica Nom

See the discussion here here for the discussion concerning this nomination. It would seem that I made a mistake in promoting the picture, and so I reversed it. If you would like to defend its promotion there, do so there by all means. NauticaShades 01:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the confusion. :) NauticaShades 02:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Uhh, what?

How was my edit to Gunbound vandalism? A listing of MMOs and a link to the publisher has no direct connection to the game whatsoever. I looked at the pages of World of Warcraft and Starcraft before I made the edit. The "See also" is irrelevant to the subject at hand. ~Ambrosia- talk 21:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to say hai

Tinucherian 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 or a possibly new friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a great day ! -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 10:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Talkback at User talk:Atyndall

Hello, OhanaUnited. You have new messages at Atyndall's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

WBOSITG's RfA

Hello OhanaUnited, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for your participation in my RfA which was passed with a final tally of 114/10/4. I'm both shocked and honoured to gain so much support from users whom I admire and trust, and I hope I can avoid breaking that backing by being the best administrator I possibly can. I will take on board the opposition's comments and I hope to improve over the coming months and years. Once again, thank you! weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 20:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

GA sweep

To be honest I've only ever done a couple of GA reviews, and never actually failed any. Lampman Talk to me! 14:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Licence/license

In Canada, "license" is a verb. When using the noun form, such as in "licence plate", the spelling is "licence". In this case, Canadian spelling follows the UK spelling, and not the US spelling, which is to use "license" for both the noun and verb. As you probably know, in many other cases (-ize, tire, etc.), Canadian spelling follows US spelling. Regards, Ground Zero | t 22:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Portal Intros

At Portal:Chicago, User:Cirt and I have been debating about the main imagery. There seems to be a current trend toward having a dynamic set of rotating images. Although the majority of WP:FPOs promoted last month had this feature, no current WP:FPOCs use this feature. He is in favor of converting the Chicago Portal in this manner using Portal:Chicago/Intro/Image. I have been against such a trend. We have debated on the portal talk page and our detailed opinions are there. In short, he thinks the feature adds dynamic artistic flair. I think that although the dynamic feature is good for giving variety in other sections of the portal, it is against the encyclopedic intent of the Portal because it does not introduce the portal to everyone in with the best summary. Does FPOC have a policy or do you as a director have an opinion?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have missed the whole point of the debate. You said "we like to see rotations instead of monthly update." Cirt and I do not disagree on this. In Portal:Chicago, we agree to use rotations at Portal:Chicago/Selected biography, Portal:Chicago/Selected picture, Portal:Chicago/Selected article, Portal:Chicago/Selected landmark, and Portal:Chicago/Did you know we use the feature and although we disagree on having a Portal:Chicago/Selected list section agree to have a rotation if we do use it. The point of the debate is an intro should be like a WP:LEAD and should give a summary of the most important details. As such I do not believe it should incorporate the rotation and Cirt does. See our debate at Portal talk:Chicago.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:HAU

Hello again. The Highly Active Users project has gone through a complete revamping per popular demand. We believe this new format will make it easier for new editors to find assistance. However, with the new format, I must again ask you to verify your information on this page. I attempted to translate the data from the old version to the new, but with the extensive changes, I may have made some errors. Thanks again. Useight (talk) 04:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks!

RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No comments on Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Earth sciences

hi, for a long time, no one has stood up to review the portal. can you please encourages some of the wikipedians to come forward and volunteer to review it. thanks for your suggestions. Sushant gupta (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment scale

I would be interested in your opinion on the Combine A and GA into GA/A class, process delegated by commmunity in cases of mature WikiProjects proposal. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN notice

There is a discussion about your edits at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Administrator_User:OhanaUnited. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

...and, apropos that, did you actually realize that User:Mbz1 is the original author of both of the images in question? You comment about "trying to discredit someone else's picture" at AN makes me suspect not. Certainly, if he feels that the latter image is a better example of his work, he should have the right to suggest that it be featured instead of the former — and I can understand his frustration at being seemingly caught in a catch-22.
I do understand that you can't really help him there (much), but you might have tried at least explaining that a bit more helpfully, or even taking the time to participate in the discussion at Commons even if you can't actually do anything about the matter. After all, part of being an administrator is that people will come to us with obscure questions, assuming that we're familiar with all sorts of wikipolicies and conventions and that we have some authority in interpreting them, even when we don't. The least we can do is to direct them to a more appropriate venue, instead of lashing out at them for wasting our precious time. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Aloha, Ohana

2 quick things... First, thank you for apologizing on the noticeboard and unprotecting your talk page. It takes a big person to be able to apologize (especially if that person thinks they were absolutely right in what they did). I hope everything is calm now between the two of you. :-)

Second, there has been some talk in that same noticeboard section about the following statement at the top of this page: "I will not respond to anonymous editors' comments. Go create an account!" While I can understand the frustration of trying to carry on a conversation with a bunch of numbers :-) this is unnecessarily mean and bitey to these newcomers. Perhaps something more like, "Because I find it difficult to follow a conversation with anonymous, IP users, I may not always respond to these editors' comments. While not necessary, it may help if you create an account." Or something less off-putting. Newbies should be able to feel welcome to comment on an administrator's talk page, and administrators should try their best to field queries from anons. Even if you decide you never want to talk to anons, I hope you at least make them feel as if they are welcome here. Mahalo, OhanaUnited! --Ali'i 13:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, you need not be Hawaiian to enjoy the aloha spirit. Many haole's have. ;-) Thanks again. --Ali'i 15:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:FT

The ones with the symbol are ones where every article is a FA or FL if possible. During the MFD of the FT project, many users thought that only topics that had all member articles featured should be called FT, so the least we could do to make them happy was have a way to set aside those that were so. It says what the symbol means at the top of the Ft page, but if that is not clear enough feel free to find a new way of labelling them. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

User's page showing up in categories

Hi Andrew,

I noticed that you commented on the talk page of the user Rimas063, so I thought you might be able to help me with a funny thing I noticed about some of his work. Some of the sub pages he had created on his user page are showing up in various categories. For example, contains an entry for Siemens AG, and it also contains an entry for the sub page he has of that article. I'm interested in getting those sub pages off of the categories pages. What do you think the best way about that would be? Thanks for taking a moment on this, and if there is any relevant community info on such a point please toss that my way and I'd be happy to learn what the standard way is...thanks.

Cheers, Wileycount (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Socppt13 request

I'd be grateful if you could take a look at WP:Suspected_sock_puppets/Socppt13 again. Per your request, evidence has been inserted. User continues soapboxing on talk page. A Checkuser could be done, but there is really no doubt. Has also returned to past history of personal attacks - see "unhinged", "bully", etc. Tks.--Gregalton (talk) 07:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

A note about your banner (not IP related)

Hi OhanaUnited. I just happened to notice that your link regarding GA's appears to be dead. User:LaraLove/GA draft was G7'd. Cheers, --Bfigura (talk) 18:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)