User talk:P3d0/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Over at VfD User:Mintguy mentioned that you had grown frustrated by some controversial edits to some computing articles. In response, there's now a new Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing and Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing/Controversial articles to help form consensus on computing topics. Please consider watching the talk pages there and using them to let others know of issues you believe merit peer review. JamesDay 15:48, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Cricket

I noticed you objected to Cricket in the featured article based on its structure. I will clarify. The first section has the history, then the objective and the players. This gives a brief idea as to what the game is all about and who plays. The next is the field. To score runs, field descriptions are vital that they be mentioned earlier on. Structure of the match is necessary else overs, innings etc would be hard to phantom. Scoring runs and dismissals come hand in hand and are next. I think that the only thing that can be promoted is the "play of the game". Do you still have objections? [[User:Nichalp|¶ nichalp | Talk]] 21:05, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

I have reviewed and updated the Cricket structure keeping in mind your suggestions, please mention if you still have any objections. The updates are mentioned in Talk:Cricket. 20:03, Sep 2, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] beta Systemic Bias section

Hi, if you wish to help contribute to a beta version of a Wikipedia page section designed to counter-act Wikipedia's systematic bias, please sign the bottom of this section on the Village pump - Wikipedia:Village_pump#Systemic_bias_in_Wikipedia. If not, no worries.--Xed 03:42, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

I don't mean to bring you down at all, and I hope you accept the feedback I gave in good spirit. As a few more people vote, you'll start getting an idea of how things are going. Just so you know, if it looks like very few people are going to support you at this time, it is perfectly OK for you to rescind your request. Noone will think badly, and actually they'll probably respect you for it. -- Netoholic @ 07:47, 2004 Nov 2 (UTC)

[edit] DeCSS picture

I uploaded the original version of Image:DeCSS.PNG. Your version is clearly better. Good work! – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 20:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Counting edits

I've been told that the only way to cound edits is the "hard way"—that is, opening your user contributions (this link is currently set to your earliest contribution). What makes this technique faster is that you can fiddle with the code that says "&offset=x". One may set 'x' into any arbitrary number, and if you're too high it simply shows nothing. So for example, you now appear to have 671. If you have many more than that, you can change the offset until there are few enough to count. Cool Hand Luke 17:54, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

http://kohl.wikimedia.org/kates-tools/count.action may be of interest. It says you have 684 edits right now. - RedWordSmith 19:46, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] For your information

Patrick, didn't know if anyone had left you this yet, but the page you might want to look at is Wikipedia:Changing username. Thanks for being so reasonable about it -- whether you change names or not, I've been very impressed by your attitude and temperament at RfA. Have a great day, Jwrosenzweig 04:31, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yep, I'm halfway through changing to Doylep. Frankly, this whole thing seems a bit over-sensitive to me. I mean, nobody suggests "wikipedia" should change their name. But I have no attachment to "p3d0" at all, so I'm happy to oblige. --P3d0 04:42, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
I agree, it is a bit too sensitive of us. Then again, I can imagine a concerned father finding that his teenage daughter was editing Wikipedia and conversing with an admin apparently nicknamed "pedo" -- perhaps getting a bit hot under the collar, or at least demonstrating a level of protectiveness and concern that might be a trifle awkward and embarrassing for everyone. Besides, I think you can agree that Wikidoylepa isn't quite as catchy a name for a reference work. ;-) Thanks again and best wishes, Jwrosenzweig 04:51, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Incidentally, the RfA was actually very close for a self-nom with under 1000 edits, and I doubt the username is any serious problem given your good work and the names of some of the current admins. If a more respected/senior wikipedian doesn't offer, I'd love to nominate you in a month or so. Cool Hand Luke 23:23, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that. I have started a new thing when I have a moment to spare... Click on a random page. Probably 4 pages out of 5 have some obvious cleanup needed (like adding {{stub}} or fixing the bullet-list structure) so that racks up the edits pretty quickly.  :-) Take care. --P3d0 13:55, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural references vs. Venus in fiction

I think "Venus in fiction" is too narrow. The section should include other cultural expressions, and references to other cultures than the Anglo-Saxon/Western. See discussion on Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates. — David Remahl 16:52, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)