User talk:Sam Korn/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
 Start a new talk topic.

This may sound odd, but I do not delete personal attacks on my user page, and I respectfully request that others do the same, if they felt otherwise moved. I may well indefinitely block anyone who places a "smile" (or anything similarly inane) on this page.

[edit] Archives

Yes, my archiving is very erratic and rare.

Current #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9

Contents


[edit] Userboxes

You're right about userboxes - they started out as a good idea, but have turned into a bad joke. violet/riga (t) 14:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] your note

Your note was irrelevant there, but if you like to let it there actually I see no problem. I can assure you that is only partial accurate. That's why I removed it since it's not really accurate and by no means should influence the election process. And the way it is it influence. Bonaparte talk 18:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It's a sad sad day.

What good is wikipedia if i can't add slightly slanderous yet true pages about my friends? —the preceding unsigned comment is by Slobhero (talk • contribs) [[Sam Korn]] 20:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocks

As the MasterCard ads say:

...Having fun at the expense of a fellow administrator... priceless. :P

Titoxd(?!? - help us) 21:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Some of the images I think might be useful:

  1. Map of the venue locations
  2. Bar graph of the top 5 players' runs scored/test
  3. " wickets taken/test
  4. bar graphs of the runs & wickets in the series
  5. runs scored (team)/innings in all 5 tests.

Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Offbreak image: Its really good! Suggestion: Could you give the path a slight curve? =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Another suggestion: Could you do a pie chart of scoring shots (singles, twos, threes, fours and sixes) during England's 1st innings at Edgbaston? The data is here, would like to use it on 2005 Ashes series to illustrate how many boundaries were hit on that day Sam Vimes 22:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Off break

I love the picci. I wish I knew how to do those. Keep up the good work, jguk 18:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I see you've also done animations for the other main spin deliveries. Excellent stuff! -dmmaus 07:48, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Hi Sam, thanks for your note. Which image do you mean exactly? SlimVirgin (talk) 12:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Can you look at my note on the deletion page? The Iranian one was tagged as a free licence then was changed to "released for promotional purposes." How is "released for promotional purposes" permission only? So far as I know, it means only that the artist wants to be identified as the artist, and has not relinquished the copyright. As for the second, I'm trying to find who is the copyright holder to ask for a free licence. Can I ask: are you asking this of everyone who has such images on their user page, or, if only me, do you know why I'm being singled out? I'm bewildered by it because I've had nothing to do with this debate. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
This would be setting an example to bullies that their tactics work. The reason I was singled out is because I objected to an admin unblocking someone a week or so ago. He has been after me ever since with various digs and insults, including trying to delete these images. It's like being in a children's playground. "For promotional purposes" is not the same as fair use, so far as I know. Can you show me where it says "for promotional purposes" images are not allowed on Wikipedia? SlimVirgin (talk) 13:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I've deleted the flowers because it says fair use on the image page, but I'd like to keep the other, because I'm not certain it is fair use, and it used to be tagged as having a free licence, so I'd like to find out whether that was changed correctly. I'm also looking for an e-mail address for the copyright holder. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My signature

Hello! I have changed the image in my signature, as per your request. Thank you for informing me of the fair use criteria for the UFP flag, I appreciate it. -- (aeropagitica) UK 15:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] F**k

Hi Sam! Thanks for your comprehension! -- Szvest 03:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up™

[edit] Images, Copyright, Userboxes, etc.

What exactly is the problem with the images I've used? All images I've put in my userboxes are promotional material or public domain. In fact they are used elsewhere on wikipedia. I don't understand why my "Stars and Swastikas" is up for deletion either (I think someone else tagged it for deletion) I've gotten nothing but positive feedback and requests to copy my userboxes for other userpages. It is unfortunate that users cannot host pictures elsewhere and just post an URL on wikipedia for images. It would save a lot a headaches all around. If you can explain why Alice Cooper's promotional photo, Dark Angel's promotional photo, and the others are violating any law I'll gladly do so. But, so far, it seems like this is an arbitrary decision with little basis in law or wikipedian policy to ground it on.--

65px "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Mike Nobody ¿ =/\= 13:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

INCORRECT. Promotional material may only be used where it qualifies as fair use, and that does not include userpages. Jimbo Wales himself has banned the use of fair use images on userpages and given permission for those who use fair use images in violation of Wikipedia policy to be blocked. There are two options in this situation: 1) remove the images, or 2) be blocked for violating policy. You are free to contest the decision, but seeing as Jimbo is the final authority on Wikipedia, I don't know who you are going to get to overrule it. -- Essjay · Talk 14:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Book ref tool

Hi Sam. I'm baffled. Congratulations and thanks to you and Rob. I'm playing with it and thinking how we could use that. That's a damned interesting track to explore. Adrian Buehlmann 23:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bug 1

{{Book reference
 | First = Grady
 | Last = Booch
 | Authorlink = Grady Booch
 | Year = 1993
 | Title = Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications
 | Edition = 2nd ed
 | ID = ISBN 0-8053-5340-2
}}

Which is:

Booch, Grady (1993). Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications, 2nd ed. ISBN 0-8053-5340-2.

The tool gives:

<cite style="font-style:normal" id="Reference-Booch-1993">[[Grady Booch|Booch, Grady]] (1993). ''Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications'', Edition 2nd ed. ISBN 0-8053-5340-2.</cite>

Which displays as:

Booch, Grady (1993). Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications, Edition 2nd ed. ISBN 0-8053-5340-2.

It should give (display part only):

Booch, Grady (1993). Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications, 2nd ed. ISBN 0-8053-5340-2.

Adrian Buehlmann 23:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question: alternate input method

Would it be possible to change the tool so that we could alternativley input (alternate input window)

 | First = Grady
 | Last = Booch
 | Authorlink = Grady Booch
 | Year = 1993
 | Title = Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications
 | Edition = 2nd ed
 | ID = ISBN 0-8053-5340-2

(ignore whitespaces and "|" on begin of lines) or

  First = Grady
  Last = Booch
  Authorlink = Grady Booch
  Year = 1993
  Title = Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications
  Edition = 2nd ed
  ID = ISBN 0-8053-5340-2

or (without line breaks):

| First = Grady | Last = Booch | Authorlink = Grady Booch | Year = 1993 | Title = Object-oriented Analysis and Design with Applications | Edition = 2nd ed | ID = ISBN 0-8053-5340-2

? (Goal: copy paste existing calls into the tool) Adrian Buehlmann 23:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is possible. It'll require me learning some regular expression stuff, so it'll take a while. Really there should be a bot to do it externally from toolserver. [[Sam Korn]] 23:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
If you want a hand with that, I'm willing to lend a few ideas. Rob Church Talk 23:27, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
A little reading through my PHP manual has taught me the basics of regex. I think Netoholic has now implemented a CSS (and therefore semantically vile) workaround. Even so, I do think that some easy method would be better. I shall spend a little more time attempting to work it out, then no doubt come to you whining for help! Call it a learning experience... [[Sam Korn]] 23:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

image:wiki-thanks.png Thank you Sam, that's very kind of you and much appreciated. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Dear Sam, I have just voted for you at the ArbCom election. My support vote was based on everything I had seen of you prior to this. I sent you a private e-mail before Christmas requesting that you would modify those comments, in which you had accused those who thought that parodies were not appropriate for sacred things of being "high-faluting, hoity-toity, wishy-washy, [and] namby-pamby". I am still requesting that you would modify your comments. Please note, however, that this request is in no way connected to my vote — neither a blackmail nor a bribe! In fact, as I am on a wiki-break, it is unlikely that I'll know if you have done it until the elections are over. For the record, I think you're an excellent administrator. I'm just saddened by your judgmental attitude towards people who think it's inappropriate to make jokes about prayers, and the Eucharist, and the Passion. (I also disagree with your support for unilateralism, but on that, at least, I seem to be disagreeing with a few other people that I highly respect.) Regards, AnnH (talk) 03:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Quick question, was this because of --^ that? If you would rather send an email, that's fine too. Of course you could just choose not to discuss, and that's your prerogative too. Thanks. --LV (Dark Mark) 17:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
That's fine. Was just wondering. See ya. --LV (Dark Mark) 17:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I for one am greatly saddened to see you allow yourself to be harassed into such. As I've said before, the page is a parody of Wikipedia, not the RCC, and merely uses the structure of the RCC to parody our own hierarchy. I think the suggestion that I lack sufficient respect for the Church or reverence for God is appalling. I completely respect your decision to de-list yourself, as so many others have done, but I hope it is because you chose to do so, and not because you share the point of view that I have failed to do God justice (I am, afterall, an Elder in my church, and a well liked and highly respected one at that). Quite obviously those who wanted to harass me and the others involved have learned nothing from my departure; I suppose it is strong evidence that I was right to write them off and return. -- — Essjay · Talk 04:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I do not lie. My reason for removing myself was entirely of my own volition. I am not sure as to whether the page makes light of Christianity or not - I fully believe that you intended it to make fun of Wikipedia, and used a structure with which you were familiar. However, I am not convinced that it hasn't got the potential to cause offence - I know that if I were unfamiliar with Wikipedia I would take offence. Thus this is as much a case of not biting the newcomers as avoiding offence. I am perfectly capable of making my own decisions in this regard, and have not been bullied into removing myself. I am only saying that I am not convinced, and therefore cannot continue in good faith to participate. I respect the work that you have done on the page. I am not detracting at all from that, and I will not complain at others being members. However, I, after much consideration, do not think that I can justify it to myself. I am being brutally honest. [[Sam Korn]] 16:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I forgot to mention. I believe (very firmly) that spiritual matters are for an individual's concern alone, not for others to dictate. I am not going to pass judgment on your opinions on this matter, just as I hope you will not judge me for mine. [[Sam Korn]] 18:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

That is fine, I respect your decision. I am heartened, however, that more individuals have joined since the persecution than had before, and that Jimbo himself made his appreciation known to me. -- Essjay · Talk 17:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Sam. Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. I'm still on a partial wiki-break, and when I did log on, I got caught up in other matters. I want to thank you for your very thoughtful, considerate reply. Also, I owe you an apology for thinking that the "namby pamby" quotation came from you. I'm actually a bit mortified by my error — not because I should have recognized that reference (there'd be no reason for me to), but because I've just finished an Open University BA in Language Studies, and one of the modules had an extensive section on recognizing inconsistencies in authorship, through clause structure, lexical choices, etc. We studied cases of linguists determining the authorship of various chapters of collaboratively-written novels, or of a farewell letter allegedly written by a missing woman (but really written by her husband, who had murdered her), of "confessions" that did not match the style of the prisoners, as in the case of Derek Bentley, and, of course, plagiarism in students. That was my favourite part of the whole course, and I was thrilled when it came up in the exam. So it's rather embarrassing that my first "judgment" of authorship after graduating was wrong! In any case, I did think that it was unlike anything else that you had written.

I must congratulate you (with envy) on having la-2 and gr-2 boxes on your user page. I hope some day to do these four Open University Latin and Greek courses, which would give me a Diploma in Classical Studies, but I'm too busy at the moment. Cheers, AnnH (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arbcom candidate userbox

Greetings. I've made a new userbox for arbcom candidates to show on their userpages so that visiters will know they're running.

{{User arbcom nom}}

If you'd like to place it on your userpage, feel free. Regards, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 02:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFC/KM

You commented on Kelly Martin's second RfC. it is up for archival. you may vote at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Kelly_Martin#Archiving_this_RfC. CastAStone|(talk) 04:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfDs

Hey, I dont notice anything when I edit pages, and lupins tool is not working anymore :(.Voice of AllT|@|ESP 21:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, I got lupins tool back...but what am I supposed to see when I edit? Does it trigger while I edit or after? What should it say?Voice of AllT|@|ESP 21:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I see it!:).Voice of AllT|@|ESP 21:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] help the blind

Can you provide me with a link to your request for adminship? Thanks, a voter. --JWSchmidt 02:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment

I replied on my talk page. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Voice of All

I didn't actually revert, but rather reposted my original comment, leaving his last edit intact. However, your point is well taken. I was hoping to settle this issue amicably between Voice of All and me, but his reactions – whether it is belligerent replies or simply removing my comments from his talk page – are preventing any useful communication. Arbitrary deletion of articles is a serious matter, and we shouldn't just let this admin continue doing so. Owen× ☎ 18:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

"Arbitrary", did you listen to anything I said? I said one "belligerent" comment involving "BS" a while back and have made nothing of the sort since then. Your RfC and other threats, and rudeness was archived from my talk. I already apologized for the word "BS". I still regret that, but that did not excuse all the drama and threats over stuff like this [2].
As Jimbo and Tony said, lets make the internet "not suck". I try to preserve and clean up what junk I can, but it is not always possible.Voice of AllT|@|ESP 18:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

You definetely derserve more stars. I mentioned an Auto-AFD tool and it was condesendingly taken out of context just to make me look like some evil guy, just before my anger really started to set in you came along with just what I was actually thinking about. Yes, there where a few monobook error at first ;-), but it works now :D. Thanks.Voice of AllT|@|ESP 19:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: ArbCom vote

I went through your deletion log before voting, and I think I found a couple of deletes where you deleted useful redirects. I can't find it now, though. It's so hard to decide who not to vote for (you can't vote for everybody).

Lee S. Svoboda tɑk 21:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CVU

Firstly, I want to apologise for our spat on IRC earlier today. I accept my share of the blame for being intransigent and perhaps a little arrogant. I should not have got as annoyed as I did. On a separate matter (and please trust me that it is separate; I have been considering this for some time), please see this post of mine to the Foundation-l mailing list. Cheers, [[Sam Korn]] 18:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, its all right some good came out of it. CVU is undergoing a reform. I was not aware of the problems originated from the group. Although I have to admit there were better ways to tell that to me :). Ne ways, forget that.
As for the images, the deletion of them will mean the end of my wikipedia contributions. Let me explain.
  1. I have been mistreated since my early career, I have been stalked all over the place for months and even with their limmited power admins and users assisted me in the hard times. Arbcom did little to halt it and even one of them suggested a year-long-ban on me for getting stalked. If it werent for a single arbcomer (Raul) the arbcommers may have looked the otherway regarding the level of stalking I recieved. Davenbelles entier contribution was stalking me which even annoyed users aside from myself such as FrencisTylers (whom has oposite POV as I do regarding PKK), DavidGerard, Phroziac, and many others. Davenbelle opsed my second RfA before the nominator could support it. He also objected at me reciving a barnstar (which changed the minds of some arbcomers I think)
  2. Pests like MARMOT and WoW as well as super-troll also gave me a serious hard time, my userpage is among the most vandalised pages on wikipedia, it is one of the RARE pages that suffered multiple vandal bot attacks. I have over 50 imposteration cases. I wrote an IRC bot that people started using whom got promoted to adminship. No objections to their adminship and I did not code the bot to get easy adminship but you'd think I wouldn't be treated like a useless troll by people simply because of that. I dont expect people to like me or hand me adminships. All I wish is to be treated with dignity. Now unblocked MARMOT, SPUI and other refurbished vandals/trolls are treated better than myself and I dont like it. I should be treated with the dignity at least marmot has.
  3. Marmot is also suspected of getting my IP from IRC, and spoofing my ip to vandalise wikipedia using a wikipedia vunrability to get me blocked. While I have no evidence if it was marmot or not, I have every suspicion.
  4. I had to put up with peoples insults, threats, and accusations on both of my rfas, and for the amout of time and effort I spend on wikipedia all the parts commutiy told me is that theyd rather leave wikipedia or promote SPUI to adminship than promote me to adminship.
  5. Then snowspinner deleted the CVU images with suspicion of copyright infirgment without even bothering to list it for 7 days. He speddied the images and many templates images were on such as Template:MARMOT, also rfared me for this. I on the otherhand looked the otherway rather than rfc him to death etc. (and yes he did oppose my RfA)
  6. Then now someone wants to get the images deleted again.
  7. While I was typing this my bot announced that there is a 3rd RfA filed by MegamanZero. As flatered I am I have to reject it. If I accept it, many people would only use it as a means to be dicks and get away with it.
I sometimes ask myself why do I bother contributing to wikipedia... I recieve this overwhelming level of hostility. These comments are not directed at you spesificaly. I am just... just... tired of dealing with stuff like this. I havent vandalised wikipedia once, sure I had a rough start regarding POV but that was about a year ago. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I haven't got time to respond to this in length right now, but I want to assure you that I fully value your contributions against vandalism. It has only ever been the format of the CVU to which I have been in opposition. I know that I didn't express myself well earlier (I rarely do on IRC), but I am a great fan of the tools that you have developed. I also think you should know that I don't necessarily think the images should be deleted. I just think they should be reappraised in light of the new guidelines. Whether they should be deleted is a Foundation matter, on which I am not qualified to comment. [[Sam Korn]] 22:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Oh I see, sorry I am a timered bomb these days... ready to explode any second. I honestly dont understand why people oppose CVU. It exists to guide people into being RC patrolers. It was successfull in this to some extent, people are lured by the nice/cool logo and they read about RC patrol and start RC patroling.
We need more RC patrolers, although its not easy/possible to "replace" RC patrolers such as RickK, this is better than nothing. CVU "Elite" are people who know about RC patroling and are among the more notable ones. I do not RC patrol myself tho, my bot limits my edit ability as I have very limmited and slow net connection.
If images go the luring from them vanishes. And hence CVU looses its main purpose. CVU colects/summerises wikipedia policies and tools into a single page making it easier for newbies. People can jump in bot aided RC patroling by just clicking ONE button without downloading software or anything (java chat). Thats something rather nice IMHO.
The importance of images kicks in here. Why the wikipedia/wikimedia logo? Well its wikipedia! :D
I commend you for your honesty in letting me know about that mail (which I understand you sent) and hope (although do not expect) you read my long rant from earlier on if you care at all. :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 23:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Interiot

Hi, I think you've put your support comment in the oppose section. I may be mistaken. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 22:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Cricket/Featured article

Thanks for moving the pages... How did you notice? -- ALoan (Talk) 21:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but I did January, and you did the rest in the next couple of minutes! -- ALoan (Talk) 21:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Did you see me do the first one and do the rest, or did we just do them at the same time? I was about to do the second, and found it was already done, is all... Getting paranoid in my old age, perhaps. Anyway, thanks again.
If you want something else to do, the format of the pages themselves needs conforming - I think it is worth adopting the "more..." usage that seems to have been adopted on the Main Page, and adding a link to Portal:Cricket/Featured article, as in Portal:Cricket/Featured article/January. :) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your arbcom

My apologies. I misread what you put in your comment section--a rather dumb mistake, but that's life. ;) I've changed my vote after realizing that you do adhere to the principles we hold so dear at Wikipedia (that it's an encyclopedia). I had read how you said that it's "very important", and just shot from the hip. Again, my apologies. Thanks for telling me, though! Matt Yeager 00:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation templates

I've noticed you asking in several places why we need templates for citations because "they're not going to change". There are two answers to this:

  1. There is every possibility that citation format might change, if consensus decides that this is desirable. I assume that you are aware that there are many "standard" formats for citation, and that we have arbitrarily picked just one.
  2. It is desirable that users creating citations are able to do so without having to learn a complex set of rules governing italics and parentheses, with huge opportunities for error. It is also desirable to be able to update and improve a citation—adding an ISBN for example—without having to start again from scratch.

Consider the analogous situation with infoboxes: there are certain people who still think that these are an abomination, and that we should be coding the tables by hand each time, conforming to a carefully-crafted "Manual of Style". Yet I'm sure you will agree that there is a Wikipedia-wide consensus that infoboxes are helpful and useful.

If all the effort which has been put into the anti-meta-template ForestFire had been put into optimising the way MediaWiki handles template transclusion, I wonder if we'd be in a far better situation now than anybody might think.

HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment.
  1. This is not a good reason for allowing high server strain. I know that there are many formats for citations, and all of them are acceptable for Wikipedia. We are not restricted to using the one on {{book reference}}. This is precisely because it was an arbitrary decision.
  2. Easy enough. [3] - this can be extended if there's a desire for it.
But infoboxes are different in two main ways. The first is that they avoid having huge amounts of complicated code at the top of the article. I think a newcomer to Wikipedia will understand the plain text format considerably more easily than a template format. Infoboxes are definitely helpful; I don't think anyone doubts that. Book references (and citations in general) don't have the same use value.
As to your last point, I couldn't agree more. [[Sam Korn]] 12:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
But the whole point is that the preferred format might be changed at some point, and the effort of searching for each and every article and changing all those references by hand simply makes me want to weep.
Thank you for providing your tool. Can you extend it so that it can be pre-filled with fields from an existing reference?
Infoboxes are not mandatory by any guideline or policy: WP:CITE is a core policy upon which WP:V and WP:NPOV lean heavily. We should be making it easier for editors to provide citations to the required standard, and to refine them afterwards. I happen to think that this is best provided by supplying templates into which the appropriate components of a citation can be inserted.
There is a slight possibility that I will have Internet access from home in the near future, and thus be in a position to install MediaWiki on a machine over which I have actual control. All I will then need to do is to learn PHP sufficiently well to fix the transclusion system, and we're laughing .
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 13:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Is there any reason why it should be changed? Will there ever be a reason why every page should be changed? Just saying a weak "there might be" doesn't seem enough to me to justify the strain on the servers.
Yes, I am writing the regular expressions (==nightmare) at this very moment.
I think you misunderstand what I am saying about infoboxes and citations. Infoboxes have three things that are very different to citations: 1) they are at the top of the article; 2) they are prone to changing globally; 3) their templated coding is far easier to understand than the plain text coding.
Actually, the best situation would be to have a parser hook built in to generate citations. I'll see if I can work out how to do it. [[Sam Korn]] 14:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Take a serious look at m:Cite/Cite.php: I think you'll find that a good starting point, especially since it already does all the work of collecting the references together. FWIW, this extension has been enabled already here on :en:, so we can make a small start with the migration as soon as we like. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 15:16, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Would it be acceptable for you, as a temporary solution, to use User:Adrian Buehlmann/work/b-ref/2 (improved CSS trick variant) for template:book reference so that we are not forced to remove calls to book reference from templates until we have better support for citations in MediaWiki? The calls in articles to book reference could be converted by a bot to something better as soon as we have citation support in MeidiaWiki. If we remove the calls from articles now we cannot go back as the "meta-information" about books ("which string is the book title?", for example) is irretrievably lost. Thank you for your careful consideration. --Adrian Buehlmann 10:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

You do make valid points. That version is far nicer than Neto's version. I far prefer making HTML tags that don't exist than demanding CSS classes that don't. It just seems far neater. I am attempting to write a book reference extension. It's not easy, though. [[Sam Korn]] 12:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smilies

For this. :) Cheers, Sango123 (talk) 23:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

For this. :)

Cheers, Sango123 (talk) 23:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

ROFL!!! That was SO funny! :=) --ViolinGirl♪ 23:45, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

There's also the in-laws: :^) and :*) (second one is slightly mustached) Sango123 (talk) 00:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Sango! For shame! He doesn't deserve a cookie! He's an EAVESDROPPER! I know some of those...[4] [5]--ViolinGirl♪ 00:15, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
For making me laugh [1], you deserve this. Although I admit, in RL it doesn't take much, either. :=D --ViolinGirl♪ 00:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
For making me laugh [1], you deserve this. Although I admit, in RL it doesn't take much, either. :=D --ViolinGirl♪ 00:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, why did you reverted my edits to Live Bootleg? I was working on it! ... No problem! Can you revert it? Thanx a lot. ByePiccolomomo 14:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting

Thanks. It's my first project creation. Is this also why my Template:Todo, Scouting links are in red? Rlevse 15:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BP

Almost there. I prefer this:

"In cases where an editor is acting in good faith, the copyright is uncertain, and there is no imminent legal threat, the editor should not be blocked."

There is almost never an "imminent legal threat" though it's good to include that. But there are plenty of instances where copyright is uncertain and there is a genuine dispute about it between editors/admins and a block should not be applied. This wording makes that clearer, I think. At least we all agree that if the copyright status of an image is known, and its use violates copyright protection, then an editor who keeps on adding it, even if appearing to act in good faith, generally should be blocked. FeloniousMonk 20:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

It is tough, isn't it? I'd jumped the gun in inserting the above, but after seeing your recent edits, I've rv'd my addition. We can work from your version if additional clarification is needed. FeloniousMonk 20:20, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Me too! Thanks. FeloniousMonk 20:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverts

Be careful on your reverts. You reverted some vandalism but not all. I got it though, no problem. --Adam (talk) 14:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The version before, the user added Hello World and a link to wikipedia.com. They were just minor changes, but not useful for the article. Just go through and compare the versions to current and last. --Adam (talk) 15:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Now I have a question. Does the 3RR still stand when you are reverting vandalism?--Adam (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why do you revert Cuba?

Sorry, I misunderstood the post. I see that you have reverted. Cheers, [[Sam Korn]] 15:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

what reason did u have for deleting my edit of thornhil 195.195.24.252 15:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi, Sam

Thought I would let you know...see this. See you around--ViolinGirl♪ 14:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Sam. I really appreciate your support. Really. Thanks.--ViolinGirl♪ 14:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] reverting

Please note that I follow a zero revert rule against most people, including you. So whatever you think needs to be done, please do it. I will never revert you. --Adrian Buehlmann 20:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] World of Dungeons Browser Game :-)

Hi,

recently i added World of Dungeons to the browser game list. You removed this change.

Is there any chance to add world of dungeons to the list?

Christian Neise -- neise@world-of-dungeons.de

131.109.225.138 23:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I also checked it out and didn't see a problem with it and added it back. Was there something wrong with it? -Moocats 19:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help!

I wonder if you might take a look at the little tiff currently going on between User:Pickelbarrel and User: Pamento. I first learnt of this rather nasty dispute when Pamento approached me on my talk page asking me if I might know how to sort it out. I replied on his talk page (telling him to avoid confrontation and if Pickelbarrel continues to report him to an Admin - stalking etc.). I then said, taking a look at some of the other things that Pickelbarrel had said, that I would pass this on to you. Pickelbarrel, as you will see on my talk page then had the cheek to make nasty comments to the effect that I should keep my nose out. He (Pickelbarrel) seems to be the main problem, but I can't be entirely sure of the history etc so I'll avoid a categorical decision on that front. Pickelbarrel also seems to like referring (in veiled threats) to some Admin named Uncle G who has already said that he really doesn't care about this squabble. (I do believe that Pamento was stupid enough to make some sort of semi-vandalism on UncleG's talk page and a direct (unsigned) vandalism on Pickelbarrel's in anguish, but I think extenuating circumstances do apply in the latter.) I was thinking of perhaps referring this case to some other authority, but was unsure of which would be appropriate.

Thanks! Dan 21:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't see a dispute, I see a scratching-and-clawing-and-hairpulling match. I can't figure out what started it, but it seems like the best thing to do is to put both of them on time out for 24 hours if they can't agree to knock it off. Tomertalk 09:21, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quiz

Hi, you got it right a few days ago, so it's your turn to ask a question. Sam Vimes 21:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm stumped for the time being, but I'm sure someone will turn up an answer. Congrats on taking the AC workload, too! :) Sam Vimes 21:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

My condolences Congratulations on your election to the Arbcom! May it be as thrilling and fulfilling as you'd imagined. I sure am glad you made it to this esteemed position - better you than me! :) – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations...

...and celebrations...

Well done on being elected to the ArbCom Sam! I can think of noone more suited to sifting through pages of evidence and putting up with ranting users than you. No really, well done. Still, rather you than me! Dan 22:17, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


Congrats from me as well, and you'll be sure to hear from your local Signpost reporter soon... ;-) Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:17, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations Sam! You'll be great. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 03:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Ditto to all above, I've every confidence you'll do a great job. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 03:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you all! Sam Korn (smoddy) 16:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration on Cartesian materialism

Two things trouble me about this:

1. What do we do when there are only two editors and they cannot agree?

2. What can we do when one editor continually insults another?

loxley 19:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks from Lulu

Storm clouds ... and silver linings Thank you for your support on my RfA.
Unfortunately, it failed to reach consensus. Nonetheless, it proved an opportunity to establish contacts and cooperation with many supportive editors, which will be beneficial to editing Wikipedia in the future. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters (t @)

[edit] Wheel warring

Since this was one of the issues during the election, I would like to hear the opinion of the new arbiters regarding wheel warring, as discussed in this ArbCom case, this quote by Jimbo, community opininon on the subject (summarized in the Signpost) and the draft Admin Code of Conduct. Please do not take this as an attack or request-for-censure of the people involved in that case I mentioned, but rather a question on the general principle whether something can be done about the increasingly prevalent wheel wars. Radiant_>|< 11:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abusive Admin

[edit] Looking for some help!

Sam, An abusive admin has blocked my pal on IP address 24.147.103.146. The admin is named Gamaliel. This admin has been reported in the past by 24.147.103.146 for copyright violation and made to revert. He must be holding a grudge. It may also be due to his POV on the Kennedys and his past invlovement in edit wars. The reason given for the block was an old RFC on Ted Kennedy. My pal added appropiate links to other Kennedy pages not mentioned in the RFC. The admin is pro Kennnedy so he blocked my pal. In any case, this is an abuse of his priv and I ask your help in bringing this to light. Thank you 193.120.103.205 05:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Signpost interview

Hello, Sam Korn/Archive 5. I hope you don't mind taking a few minutes out of your busy Arbitration schedule to answer a few questions for the Wikipedia Signpost.

  1. How do you feel about getting the opportunity to serve on the ArbCom?
  2. What do you think of the election? Do you think they were conducted properly? What could have been improved, in your opinion?
  3. What would you say to those who supported you? Opposed you?
  4. What do you think of the other Wikipedians who were appointed along with you?
  5. What do you think of Jimbo's decision to re-appoint three Arbitrators (JamesF., Jayjg, Fred Bauder)? Do you support this?
  6. After a week on the job, what are your initial thoughts?
  7. What do you think are the strengths of the ArbCom? Weaknesses?
  8. If you could change anything, what would you change? Why?
  9. What are your thoughts on the clerk's office? Do you support it? Why or why not?
  10. Do you plan on finishing your term? If you had to make a choice right now, when your term expires, would you run for re-election? Why or why not?
  11. If there's one thing you could say to the Wikipedia community, what would you say, and why?
  12. Is there anything else you would like to mention?

Congrats on your recent selection. By no means feel obligated to answer all (or any) of the questions; though we'd appreciate it if you did. An article featuring your responses will be published on Monday. Thanks a lot, and don't hesistate to ask me if you have any questions at all! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! Flcelloguy (A note?) 15:25, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Perhaps you could have a talk with your boy.

Hola Sam, I am writing regarding your boy, Dan. He seems to value your oppinion so perhaps you can get through to him. He first started becoming a menace to me after he jumped into a tiff I was having with user:Pamento, that occered after he wrote Administrator UncleG a letter questioning his thoughts on weather wikipedia was a dictionary. I knew he was teasing Administrator UncleG because in the link he was referring to Administrator UncleG had wriiten about a dozen or so times that wikipedia WAS NOT a dictionary(anyone who know him knows he NEVER strays from that oppinion. I wrote back to pamento saying that "While I understand you are triing to make a joke, try not to upset UncleG as he takes wikipedia very very seriously. NO big deal right. I didnt threaten him or call him any names. And I Only explain this to you so you can understand how he has instigated this feud, He responded by writing on my webpage EAT SHIT DICKelbarrel. Now I cant imagine how anyone would would veiw this as an acceptible responce. I repied that he was ACTING like a jerk, but refrained from EVER calling him names directly, still he repeated refered to me and Administrator UncleG as homosexual lovers, and calling us both jackasses. Finally I told him if he didnt cease he I would report him, and he would be suspended. That worked for a good while, until pamento actually found a sympathetic soul. IT WAS YOUR BOY DAN!!!! Dan told him he had an good administrator friend(presumably you) that could help him out. Pamento went right back to harrasing us. My patience was really being tested. I told DAn to mind his own bussiness as it wasnt his battle(I didnt explain all that had went on, as I figured since he wasnt an administrator, it really wasnt his bussiness) I also told him that I was suspicious that Pamento might be his sock/meat puppet, as I really couldnt think of any other reason why he WOULD GIVE TWO SHITS ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON AY ADMINISTRATOR UNCLEG'S USERPAGE. Anyway I finally got the help of emeror cenestrad who suggested we work on a project together to quell any hostilities...not only has Dan refused, and encouraged pamento to fill his userpage with insults directed at my sexuality, but he then reported to the administration that he thought emperor cenestrads comments were meant to provoke me to vandalize. If you look at his comments you find they are NOT, but can you imagine this kid actually reporteing someone for aiding and abetting a possible future vandalizer. It just doesnt seem to end. Im pretty sure that If you can convince Dan to stay out of it(I have asked him to appologize but it occurs to me that he is WAY to high-strung for that)then I will help him with one of his projects and find a way to attemp to put pamento to a rest again and we can get back to being a great big happy wiki-family. THANKING YOU IN ADVANCEPickelbarrel 00:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] So you are going to ban me based on zero evidence?

"The evidence does seem pretty damning" - What evidence?

As I have pointed out in my statement, Simon's statement is fairly factually inaccurate.

Are you going to actually check to see if what he is saying is true, or are you going to trust someone who, as I have pointed out, is extremely heavily biased against me. --Victim of signature fascism 13:17, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, there is more than zero evidence. There is no hard evidence, but there is considerable circumstantial evidence. The edit pattern is very similar, with a good deal of focus on the Christian New Testament. The IP evidence is very suggestive. Tell me, do you use BT broadband? Add to all this the gaps in the edit history and the other uncanny similarities (not to mention the fact that your actions have long bordered on trolling), I am convinced that it is highly likely. Sam Korn (smoddy) 20:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFAr

Just for the record, the question wasn't "can he be blocked if he's not being disruptive" because that's just commonsensical. The question was "can he be blocked if he is being disruptive", since several people have implied that he should not be. Hence the confusion. Radiant_>|< 17:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair question. Nevertheless, I'd still say the result is equally obvious. Sam Korn (smoddy) 20:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for clarifying that. Radiant_>|< 22:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] coul;d you let me know..

when you've talked with user:Dan ? I am going to try to help him out with a article hes working on, but do not want to go in there if hes going to be hostile about it, as Im sure that will just add fuel to his fire. I think it wont be long until pamento is wiped from wikipedia completely(at long last), and if user:Dan is NOT working with pamento he should appreciate any help I give. Still it would be nice to know if "the coast is clear". I appreciate any help you can give, and while I realize you are very busy your homepage DOES suggest if I have ANY problem, to come to you, so I will offer my thanks again for your future helpPickelbarrel 19:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I have absolutely no desire to intervene in such a petty conflict. Sort yourselves out, be civil, and give before expecting to receieve. If someone is harassing you, ignore them. That advice always goes. Sam Korn (smoddy) 20:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Well perhaps I didnt realize that when you said you would do what you could to help, you actually meant to write that you would do what you could IF YOU DESIRE, but since that wasn't marked on your homepage(a mistake I have rectified) I must insist that you help regardless in this instance. Your boy Dan will gain nothing from this advice if you fail to send it to him, and I would ask that you also tell him that he should "assume good faith" from fellow wikipedians. This will surely help me to help him, and as you have said that you WOULD help I am again requesting that you do soPickelbarrel 21:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An Esperanzial note

As I remember, the last spam that was handed out was on the 20th of December last year, so I think it's time for another update. First and foremost, the new Advisory Council and Administrator General have been elected. They consist of myself as Admin General and FireFox, Titoxd, Flcelloguy and Karmafist as the Advisory Council. We as a group met formally for the first time on the 31st of Decembe. The minutes of this meeting can be found at WP:ESP/ACM. The next one is planned for tonight (Sunday 29 January) at 20:30 UTC and the agenda can be found at WP:ESP/ACM2.

In other news, Karmafist has set up a discussion about a new personal attack policy, which it can be found here. Other new pages include an introductory page on what to do when you sign up, So you've joined Esperanza... and a welcome template: {{EA-welcome}} (courtesy of Bratsche). Some of our old hands may like to make sure they do everything on the list as well ;) Additionally, the userpage award program proposal has become official is operational: see Wikipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award to nominate a userpage or volunteer as a judge. Also see the proposed programs page for many new proposals and old ones that need more discussion ;)

Other than that, I hope you all had a lovely Christmas and wish you an Esperanzially good new WikiYear :D Thank you! --Celestianpower háblame 16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Message delivered by Rune.welsh using AWB. If you wish to recieve no further messages of this ilk, please sign your name here.

[edit]  ??????

I noticed that you changed your userpage, in acordance with my wishes, and I think that you will find I have not acted in an uncivil or inflamitory way. But, in case you may have misinterperated something I have said let me again ask...Will you please ask your boy Dan to assume good faith when dealing with fellow wikipedians as his behaviour is causing me turmoil. If you veiw his comments in this matter I think that you will find he sided with a HOSTILE party, and you reminding him that entering a fray without looking into the facts can be dangerous. It is not an exageration to state that MOST WARS ARE THE RESULT OF A GROUP OF MEN NOT GETTING ALONG WITH ANOTHER GROUP OF MEN, and by reminding your boy Dan that his behaviour did more damage than goood, you will have helped me greatly. If you do not do this because it is not something you desire to get involved in, I must ask that your userpage makes this stance clearPickelbarrel 22:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

May I suggest that shouting is never considered civil. Nor, for that matter, is calling someone "your boy". Quite apart from the images of pedastry this invokes, it is insulting to Dan to suggest that I may alter his opinions merely by talking to him. I think, if you could manage not to come across as angry, you could have a perfectly reasonable conversation with him yourself. Sam Korn (smoddy) 23:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
      • When I was "shouting" I was not doing it to be uncivil, and you will find that there are lots of times that using capital letters are considered quite civil, and Shouting is not only often considered civil, but quite humane under the right circumstances for example "WATCH OUT FOR THAT CAR!!!!!" ...I state this just to show that your argument is flawed. As for the your boy, where I come from (Indiana) the term is used to show a close relationship between a Vetren and novice. I am not sure if it is used outside of this area, but when I have said "Your boy has made a mess of things" outside of this area, it has never been met with contempt. If you took it that way I APPOLOGIZE...again not meant in anger but just to accentuate the point. As for me asking him myself, you will find I have tried, but have been deleted and ignored with prejudice, and only went to you because your opening page promised you would help. As of yet you have succeeded only in wasting my time, so I ask again, perhaps you could PLEASE, pretty pretty please with candy and sugar, ask your young male friend to "assume good faith, and try to behave in a civil manner...this will help to quell future disputes I assure you. Again I will offer my thanks as I am assuming that you will act.Pickelbarrel 23:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Apology accepted. In general, though, you are more likely to get heard on Wikipedia if you don't use capital letters. For emphasis, emboldening text is more likely to be well received. As to the "your boy" thing ("your young male friend"), I guess it comes from attending a Welsh all-boys school that one becomes very attentive to comments that could be seen as labelling one as homosexual. As to talking to Dan, is there an immediate issue? Do you have a problem that is continuing? If so, please get back to me and I'll reply when I'm not 1200 words of the way through a 1500 word essay at 11.58 pm with the essay due at 12.00pm... Sam Korn (smoddy) 23:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

(see [6] for the context for the next exchange. Sam Korn (smoddy) 00:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Um, what? I was making wry statements about how British people might see those comments. I just happen to be 16 myself, so it's hardly a crime for me to be an ephebophile. You appear to have completely got the wrong end of the stick. My entire attempt was to remark that your comments were implying something that just plain isn't true (for full disclosure, I am avowedly heterosexual and have the scars to prove it). This bit of prime incivility was exactly what I was talking about before. Please don't make such baseless and horrific accusations again. Sam Korn (smoddy) 00:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC) soRRY i WAS JUST ABOUT TO ERASE THEM, AS THOUGHT i MIGHT HAVE BEEN GETTING CARRIED AWAY

[edit] Sorry 'bout all that.

The moment after writing the previous comments, it occured to me that I was the one who was getting upset before hearing your side of the story(ironically I started writing you to see if I could convince you to get Dan to see the folly of that). I do truthfully appologize from the bottom of my heart for my mistake...I should have at least waited to hear your reasonings for your commnets, now that I have I am embarresed to have ever jumped to such a conclusion. I am a father and the dangers of thoose that lurk behind the walls of the internet are a bit of a sensative subject, and as you are an administrator I assumed you were an adult, but that does NOT excuse me for acting like such an ass. Sorry 'bout all that. Truely. You didnt deserve to be at the end of my tirade(I was ready to delete it almost immediately after writing it, but you had already read it). I hope we can bury the hatchet on this one, and I assume full resposibility for being in the wrong here.Pickelbarrel 07:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket Quiz

An answer posted. Should we move on? Johnlp 12:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dyslexic agnostic and T-man

I thought you should be aware of the latest developments: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dyslexic Agnostic/Evidence#Fourth asserion. Dyslexic agnostic 16:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I HAVE HAD IT WITH CONSTANT ATTACKS BY T-MAN. The arbitration is just a further opportunity to attack and attack and attack, a relentless illegible onslaught. PLEASE JUST MAKE IT STOP! Dyslexic agnostic 05:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moving disendorsements

As one of the thoes guilty of making disendorsements, it's the least I could do. :-) --Deathphoenix 19:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)