User talk:Sapphic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Older messages:
NOTE: I am in the process of cleaning up the Pseudoscience category so that it all fits on one page. I am doing this by removing redundant categories from articles, for example: Category:Divination is already a sub-category of Category:Pseudoscience so an article should not be listed in both. I am human and make mistakes, so please feel free to point out these mistakes on this talk page. --Sapphic (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I see your point. I guess that also means all New Age has to be pseudoscience. I'm not 100 % sure it's true, but personally I have nothing against thi idea, and if this is the Wikipedia categorising/linking policy, let's keep it that way. Sorry about the inconvenience ;) Piechjo (talk) 10:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Bushrod Washington James
Another editor has added the {{prod}}
template to the article Bushrod Washington James, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}}
template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:MWA query
Hi Sapphic! Is the SQL query you use to create WP:MWA public? I'm trying to do a similar page for huwiki (and too lazy to write my own :) --Tgr (talk) 21:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Category:Wikipedia Backlog
Hey. Your edits as categories being no longer backlogged are confusing. I went and checked them and they're still clearly backlogged. Can you explain them? Wizardman 01:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- The {{backlogged}} template had been removed from them all some time ago. If they're still backlogged, they should have the template. --Sapphic (talk) 01:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- I reverted those edits and will be adding the template the cats.--BirgitteSB 03:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I would be interested in seeing the analysis when you are done. Please keep me informed and good luck.--BirgitteSB 20:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Articles
Thank you for your offer; I didn't realize that you could do those things with the database dump. I'm going to hold off on your offer because this WikiProject is essentially inactive - that is, all the editors who were working on it seem to have quit participating in Wikipedia. But if I do see any signs of interest, I'll get back to you. And I may have some other things to ask if you can do - you do indeed seem to have a resource worth using. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 10:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:Phony orphans
Hi, I was wondering how your script calculates how many incoming links the articles listed on the Wikipedia:Phony orphans page have. I've come across a couple that have fewer parents than are listed, and this one which is actually still orphaned, although it is listed (at #54) as having 10 parents.--Aervanath's signature is boring 00:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- It bases the numbers on the contents of the 2008-03-12 database (XML) dump of the English Wikipedia, so probably there were some links removed between then and now. I'm currently extending my script using Perlwikipedia to do some checks against the current versions, which should correct for changes made since the database dump. --Sapphic (talk) 01:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] re: Wikipedia:Phony orphans
Thanks. I'll look into using that. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] No content in Category:AIDS reappraisal
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:AIDS reappraisal, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:AIDS reappraisal has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:AIDS reappraisal, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- May I ask you why you put the {{hangon}} tag on the above cat. It meets WP:CSD#C1 pretty clearly. I have not removed the tag, but I ask you to do so. Thanks LegoKontribsTalkM 01:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- The category was only empty because another editor created a replacement category and moved all the members of the original category, rather than renaming the original category as would probably have been better. I believe somebody else is planning to take it to CfD, which I think is probably a good idea (it's one of the controversial topics people always fight about, so better to go through the whole routine for every little change rather than have revert wars I suppose) and it'll most likely be deleted that way. I originally opposed the move/rename-delete but my main reason turned out to be wrong so I've (mostly) changed my mind, and I don't think anyone else really cared about keeping it. I still don't think it should be speedy deleted, though. --Sapphic (talk) 06:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- That was me. I didn't see a "rename" button on the category, so if it's there and I missed it, my apologies. Antelantalk 15:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- Renaming of categories happens through the WP:CFD process, which is where the category is now anyway, so no harm done. I'm not sure whether admins can move/rename the category directly, or if it's just done in precisely the same way you did (create replacement, transfer articles, delete original) but in any event, I don't think it's a big deal. --Sapphic (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- That was me. I didn't see a "rename" button on the category, so if it's there and I missed it, my apologies. Antelantalk 15:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- The category was only empty because another editor created a replacement category and moved all the members of the original category, rather than renaming the original category as would probably have been better. I believe somebody else is planning to take it to CfD, which I think is probably a good idea (it's one of the controversial topics people always fight about, so better to go through the whole routine for every little change rather than have revert wars I suppose) and it'll most likely be deleted that way. I originally opposed the move/rename-delete but my main reason turned out to be wrong so I've (mostly) changed my mind, and I don't think anyone else really cared about keeping it. I still don't think it should be speedy deleted, though. --Sapphic (talk) 06:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Happy Holidays
[edit] Proposed deletion of Taylor algorithms (fiction)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Taylor algorithms (fiction), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ~~ N (t/c) 15:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)