User talk:Ta bu shi da yu/Archive5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] A question

Hello again! Say, what would you think about being nominated for doing additional work? I think you'd make a fine admin, and we surely could use all the help we can get. I'd gladly nominate you—think about it and tell me how you feel about this. Lupo 14:31, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're online? Hey, what time is it in Australia?? I thought of placing the nomination tomorrow morning (UTC), when most of the current nominations will have expired. Would that be allright with you? Lupo 14:39, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sure you do. If I wasn't sure, I wouldn't have proposed it, having gone through an unsuccessuful nomination myself. If that should happen all the same, just shrug it off. But you have done a lot of good work here since June, shown community involvement, obviously are dedicated, and you have way over 5000 edits—who in his or her right mind could oppose? :-) And anyway, it's not so much a job involving authority, I think of it more like offering to help doing some cleanup. Lupo 15:00, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Hi, ta bu shi da yu.

Hi. Would you take a look at my recent admin nomination? [1] I'd be honored to have your support. Warmest regards, [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 00:03, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 00:29, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Moved from user page

Thanks for your comments. I have had no problems with you personally or the various issues we have discussed. On your policy comments, I am of the view that Wikipedia needs to become more like an ordinary encyclopaedia, having enforceable standards of quality and accuracy and articles which are stable and only change when they need to or can be improved. It also needs to be more POV, in the sense that I have discussed at my Talk page, that is it needs to have an editorial policy which it enforces. Adam 02:40, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Admin nomination

Hi, I have nominated you on WP:RFA. The rules ask that you now formally accept (or decline, if is so were :-) the nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ta bu shi da yu. Good luck! Lupo 07:04, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've voted for you - I was planning to nominate you, but it seems Lupo beat me to the punch! Ambi 09:46, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • You're welcome! --ℛyan! | Talk 12:02, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] John Howard

the point was that, that was the version that had been around for ages and someone just changed it so i put it back to the long held version. the fact that you changed it back to this new (i thought POV) version made me make those assumptions. i am sorry if i caused offence. Xtra 02:09, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Casualties in the conflict in Iraq

Hi - you wrote on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates that you thought the article was written from the POV of a coalition member. I'm the one who wrote the sentences you objected to, and I think you just misunderstood what I meant by what I wrote: when I said "should we count injuries", I meant we in the sense of "should one count injuries", not "we" as in "the members of the coalition". Anyway, I can see how it could have been confusing, and I think the section is clearer now. Thanks for your contributions to the article.

By the way, I agree it could use a better title, and I'm proposing Casualties in the conflict since 2003 in Iraq. Neow 19:53, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Admin nomination

Thanks for your message - good luck with the nomination, I think you would be an excellent choice. I've even taken your advice and archived most of my talk page! I was wondering if you'd had a chance to look at the Fourth International article you raised some eminently reasonable objections to; I've tried to clarify it hoped for some feedback on whether it is clearer or if there are some areas which could be improved. thanks, Warofdreams 13:11, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome - you deserve admin. Happy editing, Rhobite 02:34, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

Whoops, I forgot to respond. :) You're a great editor, and your work over at WP:FAC is extraordinary. :) P.S. In the scripting languages I use, the issue of function overloading doesn't come up much, but operator overloading, now that's a whole kettle of exploded whales.... ;-) func(talk) 03:00, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Ta bu shi da yu--you're quite welcome, and I think you're going to be a great admin. Btw, enjoyed those whale explosions. Happy editing! Antandrus 03:06, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks. And of course, for the good work. Also makes me feel good because I nominated your nominator (Lupo) :) -- Chris 73 Talk 03:58, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations! Happy admining! --Slowking Man 05:20, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome. I was already aware of you from K5 and HuSi. Good luck. I wondered if I was elligible to vote. I looked at the user pages of some people who voted and they were all admins (I am not one). Trying to vote is one way to find out. Tim Ivorson 09:36, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and congratulations – you'll be a great admin. ffirehorse 19:33, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] admin duty

hey there is a stub called National Autonomous University in Mexico which is a mistake and should be a redirect to the article National Autonomous University of Mexico. could you use you 1337 admin powers to fix this. ive changed one link to the stub, but i dont know how to find out what other pages might link there, nor how to change a page into a redirect. thanks mate.

ps, ill email my old teacher about maybe helping you with your aboriginies.

The bellman 11:24, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] A Hard Day's Night

Gosh, thanks for the compliment. Actually this is how I work on practically every song article I've contributed to, except Yesterday. I threw (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction together in one edit too. I actually keep a list of the articles I've done work on at my user page. Anyway, thanks again for the compliment. It's not that hard to do as long as you have the material to compile into an article. Johnleemk | Talk 13:53, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Sighs and punctuation

I wasn't online, but it seems Grunt already fixed it. BTW, if you've just moved an article A to B, this actually renames A to B and creates a new A with the redirect. You can just move B back to A, provided A doesn't have a history yet. (Looks like this was the case, for I don't see any deletion of either article having taken place.) An admin is needed only if A has been edited since the move, and thus does have a history. In this case, the admin first needs to delete A before moving B back to A.

As a side note, I'm very happy for you that your nomination is going so well! Lupo 18:43, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Yes you're a goose

I spent 18 months on MTS and, although it wasn't slavery, I wasn't exactly getting any form of liveable wage from it! One Salient Oversight 11:00, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was an MTS worker at St Paul's Carlingford, 1994-95. I also went to SMBC in 1992-93. My MTS experience was NOT wonderful, mainly because my minister advised me not to go into ministry - but since then I have reflected upon the experience and I now reckon he got it wrong. Long story. However I still have a great deal of time for the whole Sydney Anglican / MTS / Moore College / Phil Jensen scene, but I think now that there are some problems with its "culture". I am now in Newcastle and I am an elder at Charlestown Presbyterian Church, where I have preached often. Newcastle is not a great place church wise and there are only about 6 or 7 "Bible-teaching" churches for about 250000 people. One of my medium-term goals is to return to Christian ministry and plant a church here. Check out my contributions list and you'll realise how much work I've been doing in creating and editing evangelical Christian articles - I even wrote most of the Sydney Anglican article. Ironic now that I'm Presbyterian... One Salient Oversight 11:51, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Table help

I've updated my response at the help desk to get rid of the gaps in the lines. [[User:Noisy|Noisy | Talk]] 12:59, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Bingo. Exactly what I wanted! Noisy is a legend:
first header exclamation mark
makes it bold
first entry second entry
vert bar hyphen
cells start with a vert bar
third entry
starts a new line
or a double bar if on the same line

Ta bu shi da yu 13:02, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Now that I've figured out the cellspacing issue, my solution is looking overly complicated for your article, and screws up line alignment. I'll try and simplify it. (Revert back if not to your liking.) [[User:Noisy|Noisy | Talk]] 23:19, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I tried setting everything to zero ... except that overall cellpadding! Well done. [[User:Noisy|Noisy | Talk]] 14:34, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] DC Revisions

Thank you for your comments on Wikipedia:Peer review regarding Dawson's Creek. I went through and did some tidying, cut a few lines here and there, and moved the broadcast history list up to immediately follow the synopsis as Ambi suggested. (Originally when I wrote the article, that was the first thing after the lead.) I changed "worthwhile book" to "thorough" per your comment. The one or two other volumes I've seen were cut and paste instant books for teens; so the one I mentioned was the only one of substance.
I don't have any pictures there because I'm not able to do that; I work on a computer in the public library and downloading and uploading files is not allowed. I posted a request on the the pictures page, but nobody has responded. If you are able to add pictures, I would be grateful--perhaps the pages linked to at the bottom of the page could supply some. Again, thanks for your help. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 15:59, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)

  • Would you be able to post a photo from here on the Dawson's Creek article for me? The second one, the title card over the dock, is what I favor. Thanks so very much for your help with the article. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 20:02, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Jwrosenzweig

This is completely irrelevant to anything at all, but you might find his username easier to pronounce if you think of it as "J. W. Rosenzweig" ;-) Regards — Kate Turner | Talk 19:11, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)

[edit] Admin nom

My pleasure. We need more good admins here. Filiocht 07:24, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

And congratulations on Cyclone Tracy amking the main page today. Filiocht 08:34, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] You're a sysop!

administrator. Congratulations!. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:11, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations! A glorious landslide!! —Stormie 06:52, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
Congratulations! I was glad to see that other editors think highly of you, too—although maybe it's just that the political clout of an admin in high standing has subdued any potential dissenters, who feared being listed at Wikipedia:Deranged Wikipedians for being out of their right mind :-) Or whatever... Again, congratulations, mate! Lupo 06:58, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I'll join in here, congratulations. Such a clear consensus is really rare! Anárion 08:03, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
What everyone else has said. Filiocht 08:17, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
Congrats, TBSDY, on deservedly becoming an admin. Keep up the great work. JOHN COLLISON [ Ludraman] 11:29, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC) (PS If you're into literature, maybe you could help out with John B Keane, the current Lcotw. There aren't enough Lcotwians ATM!)
Congrats - I would have voted if I kept up with these things! T.P.K. 12:35, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • My congratulations to you on your election. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 14:29, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] How was it for you?

Your first deletion, I mean? Mine was to delete and then restore myself, which is obscurely surreal... -- Graham ☺ | Talk 09:07, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RfD

Hey, thanks for the help dealing with University of Thessaloniki. I keep meaning to deal with it, but I've been busy recently editing real articles (a pleasant change from doing housekeeping :-). Noel 12:23, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ooops! The page was supposed to wind up at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, not University of Thessaloniki. So it looks like you just reversed someone else's incorrect attempt to do the request. (The page history is now missing at least one of the listed contributors, so no merge was done.) Noel 12:33, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Well, I'll look through the deletion log to see if I can find where the page was deleted before. If I can find it, we can fix this. Noel 12:56, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Two other notes:

  • You need to wait for a week or so after a page has shown up before taking action. See WP:DP#Lag times for the policy. I personally like to wait a week or so after the discussion on any page has died down, but that's probably being extra-cautious.
  • Once you have completed an item, delete all the related text on WP:RfD right then and there (otherwise the page will gunk up with old entries).

Noel 12:56, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nah, don't worry about it. I think I saw only only article that slipped under the time guidance, King of Cambodia, and I don't think anyone's going to gripe about that. But I thought I should warn you before you did step on some toes! :-) Noel 13:05, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your nice comments. 172 19:29, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Christian articles on Wikipedia

What do you think of the idea of having a full-time writer employed by a mission agency writing and editing articles on Christian theology and history? One Salient Oversight 08:08, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Lake Burley Griffin

Hi, I have been working on the Lake Burley Griffin article and have provided photos. It probably no longer needs to be listed as requiring images on Wikipedia:Australian wikipedians' notice board. If you end up getting any images that are better than the one's I have supplied feel free to replace them. Martyman 03:31, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Penguin pic

Hey TBSDY. I like the penguin wearing a sweater pic. Just wanted to ask why you chose to upload it over a previous picture of penguins that also seemed to be quite nice. I would have thought it better to keep both under different names but is there perhaps some protocol I don't know about? Thanks. Oska 01:42, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney

Thanks for letting me know last month about Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney and Wikipedia:Australian wikipedians' notice board. I'm not still editing as much as I was, but I'll try to catch up with what's going on real soon. -Zigger 07:29, 2004 Oct 23 (UTC)

[edit] Talk: GST & Talk: Childrenoverwhatever.jpg

I deleted the GST page because it contained only a 'suggested links' report, which I implemented. As there is no point leaving them behind to clutter talk pages after being incorporated, I got rid of it. As nothing else was on the page, it made sense to delete it. I realize now it had a COTW history, but IMHO, I still don't see any reason to keep it. As for the image's talk page, I had moved the copyright details to the main image page, where I think the belong (and where they're more likely to be seen). Nothing else being on the talk page, I deleted that too. Now the same information is on both the main image page and the talk page for no good reason.

I don't see anything wrong with deleting talk pages that don't contain any real talk, and it's better to have a redlink at the top of the main article to show that there is no talk, rather than a bluelink, which, having been followed, wastes someones time. My opinion anyway. T.P.K. 08:39, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Very well, I'll refrain from deleting talk pages, not that I have done often, and I don't believe anything truly significant was deleted, anyways. T.P.K. 08:48, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Nation of Islam anti-semitism

Ah, you reverted this? They did have a discussion on VfD, and apparently voted to delete it. They moved some of the content to the article it pointed to, and then coverted the article to a redir, and asked for that to be nuked (not sure why, maybe the person who did the work wasn't an admin, and couldn't). Since they did have the VfD discussion, this isn't an attempt to bypass VfD. Unless you have a problem, I'm going to go ahead and zap it. Noel 22:30, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sigh, I took Rossami's word for it, instead of carefully reading the VfD discussion page. Let me look into this a little more - I think a lot of the content was moved into the Farrakhan page. Noel 00:46, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
And to make it even more difficult, Rossami's an admin. When you can't take an admin's word on something, how is this place gonna work? Sigh. Noel 20:48, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] International Buttsecks Day

I did not recreate this page. I deleted it four or five times, and it was repeatedly recreated by several different anonymous users. I figured the best way to end the vandalism would be to blank and protect it, rather than attempt to keep deleting it every time it reappeared. I have deleted it now, since the vandals have probably given up. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 14:35, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WP:VP

Hey, once you're back from your wiki-vacation, if you really want a challenge, you can try getting WP:VP back to reasonable size by archiving some discussions. If you decide to do this, make sure to liase with whoever's been doing it before, and also make sure to get the complete lowdown on when to archive threads, and how. But it really needs doing, and I'm (alas) a little too busy to tackle it. Noel 23:49, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Who's dealing with it? By all appearances, no-one. I think the old way of archiving to relevant talk pages of articles should be scrapped - it's too much work. Instead older sections should be cut en-masse and pasted into archive sub-pages (much as I do with my user-talk. One can offer summary links to the most recent sections with not much effort. At each archiving, the previous summary links can be placed on a separate Archive parent page. My archiving of 32kB takes about 5 mins using this method. VP would be cut down to size within an hour I betcha! See my user talk and archives. zoney ♣ talk 12:33, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)