User talk:Lar/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
← Archive 6 |
Archive 7
| Archive 8 →

I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.


This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 15 May 2006 through about 1 June 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others.

An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex.

Talk Page Archives
My post 2012 archived talk
Archive 79 1 December 2012 through 1 December 2013
Archive 80 1 December 2013 through 1 December 2016
Archive 81 1 December 2016 through 1 December 2018
Archive 82 1 December 2018 through 1 January 2021
Archive 83 1 January 2021 through 1 January 2023
Archive 84 1 January 2023 through 1 January 2025 ??
RfA Thank Yous
RFA Archive Howcheng (27 Dec 2005) through present
All dates approximate, conversations organised by thread start date

from Wikipedia talk:DRV/U[edit]

"I still oppose out of process, though, and will continue to do so."

I can respect that. I'll even agree with you in many cases, I just happen to draw the line on the other side of userboxes. Thanks for being bold and updating the criterion; I hope it sticks. -GTBacchus(talk) 16:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"We're not trying to establish social justice; we're trying to write an encyclopedia. Fairness and consistency aren't the point, WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:NOR are, as applied to articles. Everything else matters only insofar as it serves those. Encouraging the expectation of a social justice system doesn't serve the encyclopedia."
I fear I haven't made my point clear enough yet. WP is not a democracy, it's not a country, it's not an experiment in social justice. It's not even a commmunity except insofar as any collection of people is a community, and insofar as it supports the goal, which is writing an encyclopedia. I draw the analogy to work, not to government. I have an expectation that my employer will use process and policy in my work environment in order to ensure that all employees are treated consistently and fairly. If that expectation is not met, and I cannot change it, I seek employment elsewhere. We are volunteer employees here, if you like, here because we want to be, and paid in currencies (respect, barnstars, collegiality, pride of creation, on and on, whatever) that vary from person to person, but we are carrying out the work. The work cannot continue without us and editors are the lifeblood of the encyclopedia. Insofar as we have a system that is perceived as arbitrary, capricious, cabalistic, cliquish, or unfair, we will lose editors. maybe not all of them, certainly, but enough that not being fair, not being reasonable, not having process and policy, and not following them except in a very small subset of instances, harms the encyclopedia. THAT is the reason I speak out in favour of process, not because this is some great social experiement for its own sake, but because it keeps editors on the job. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 16:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I finally have time to reply. First of all, thank you for your well thought-out comments. I understand that you're presenting a metaphor: Wikipedia is like a job. It's true that Wikipedia is like a job in some respects. Thinking of it as "like a job" will lead one to have certain expectations that one associates with jobs. I think I don't have the same expectations you seem to have because I have a different metaphor (or bundle of metaphors) in mind.
When I work on Wikipedia I feel I'm participating in an organic process, in which structure and order emerge in an elegant way from the actions of thousands of independent agents. Maybe it's like the way an ant hill or beehive operates, I don't know. I know it's messy, in the sense that living things are messy: it's always in a state of flux, and its left hand doeesn't always know what its right hand is doing. The "rules" (except for about 3 policy pages) are a dynamic set of mutually contradictory aphorisms that constantly mutate in reaction to new terrain, as we feel it out. This has to happen to give Wikipedia the flexibility to adapt to whatever it encounters.
The mechanism of that "feeling out" process is our willingness to not be process bound. We have to constantly innovate, see something that seems like a good idea and do it, be bold, evaluate each application of process in terms of how well it builds the encyclopedia, make mistakes, etc, etc. We have to cross lines constantly, to keep track of their motion, and we try to document it in the written guidelines. Borrowing from a completely different metaphor, we have these gardens of red tape we grow, to support the encyclopedia, and we have to prune the heck out of those gardens by cutting through the Gordian knots that inevitably arise everywhere.
Talking about fairness on an individual level seems somehow irrelevant and distracting when I'm thinking of Wikipedia the way I'm describing. I'm not sure I'm expressing it very well. Let me address your words: I don't perceive Wikipedia as "arbitrary, capricious, cabalistic, cliquish, or unfair," at least not in a negative sense. I perceive it as alive, in a limited way. It's trying to be a mind. A mind can't document each thought before it has it. A degree of arbitrariness and caprice are necessary for creativity. Cabalism and cliquishness are usually illusory, but insofar as they exist, I don't think of them as that, so much as some droplets being at the front of a wave, and others somewhere inside it. They're all necessary, as is the tension and pressure of droplets pushing against each other. Otherwise, no wave. Unfairness... I dunno, I just don't see Wikipedia as a place where fairness and unfairness happen.
Am I making any sense at all? -GTBacchus(talk) 23:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some. Like the elephant and the blind men... WP is more than we think. Those that say WP is like a democracy are not entirely wrong (mostly, but not entirely). Those that say WP is like a job are not entirely wrong either (less wrong than the first). Those that say that WP is like an organism also are not entirely wrong. My thinking in response to your comment though, is this. WP may be like a living thing but it's like one in which the red blood cells can up and leave if they want to. The body continues to live after a small cut in which some cells leave. But not after a major one in which many do. Treat the cells unfairly (even if there is no such thing as fairness) or in a way the cells perceive as unfair, and off they go.
Further, while I am well aware there is no cabal there certainly are cliques. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with that. We are political animals, we humans.
Finally I strongly disagree that we should not be process bound. Process is goodness. But it is not immutable. Where it needs changing, we need to change it with alacrity. The current CSD/UB debate is part of the meta-process of changing process. ++Lar: t/c 02:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think we're understanding each other a bit. I agree with that first part, about the elephant.
I can't agree with your motto about process. Process is very good until it's bad, and then it's bureaucracy and instruction creep. I think that digging something up to rebury it, which keeps getting suggested at DRV, is process gone bad, for example.
You're right about people getting upset and leaving if they perceive mistreatment. That's hard to talk about in the abstract - are we talking about people having their userboxes deleted here? Is that the unfair treatment at stake, or is something else in mind? In general, I would think we should be able to better educate users as to what Wikipedia's like, and then they might not perceive injustice in what is perfectly normal functioning. -GTBacchus(talk) 05:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picking up the thread late...[edit]

But since I'm watching this page again now, I thought this chat worth getting in on. Rather than espousing my particular take on the importance of rules, I'll just add some free-form thoughts on XfDs1and how they may come to a close. There will probably be multiple tangents and asides, so feel free to skim. I've signed every section so that if someone wants to tell me I'm an idiot for something I say in the middle it's easy to do so. This is the closest I've ever come to writing a "wiki-philisophy" essay.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's policy?[edit]

What is it that we are actually talking about when we say "process" anyway? Looking at blocking policy for instance, the earliest document is almost unrecognisable from the current form. Almost every policy/guideline/process/whatever has grown organically. (Ignoring the bolted-on-travesty of clerkdom2, for the moment.) When we say "follow the rules" we're really saying "do what everyone has agreed." WP:WEB works because (despite some "take-it-to-RfArb" resistance) the majority came to an agreement. WP:SCHOOL failed to work because of bloody-mindedness and failure to compromise from some quarters.3 The most stable policy pages are often those that have at some stage seen the most highly-charged editing. But once we work it out together, they keep the masses happy.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pareto curve[edit]

The vast majority (over 85% of the sample I took) could have there outcome predicted by the first five participants. That is to say, if someone just came along and closed the discussion pretty much whenever they felt like it, there would be no problem at all. We know this intuitively, and it's what we're referring to most of the time when we call upon the power of wp:snow. Even more powerfully, it's what makes {{prod}} work at all.4 But when it comes to deletion, a 15% error rate is simply massive I think we'd all agree. So we've got one reason to let things run their course: We don't know ahead of time what the outcome is going to be. Some other unstructured thoughts: On several occasions I've asked admins who closed borderline AfDs as "no consensus" to re-open them, and in every case after running for ten days they had gone to clear deletions. We go outside the rule set there and it's unpopular with those who said "keep" but it's pretty hard to argue that it was the wrong thing to do. This is coming around to "what's the purpose of rules" in a round-about manner, I know.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Social factors[edit]

Ok, so feeling around here, we've got that the "rule" about not closing early has some good reasons: Uncertainty. But there are also times when we're pretty damn sure what the outcome is going to be (knowing of course that we might be wrong) and still not want to close early. This is the "perception of fairness" that has been mentioned before. The encyclopedia doesn't give a rat's arse about "fair" of course, but the contributors do. Everyone wants their contributions valued, both article facts and meta-opinions. Most people are ok with things going a way they oppose as long as they feel like they have been listened to. Letting things run for the full period also gives less ammunition to those people who are really only looking for reasons to complain. In the end, though, we are willing to sacrifice the feelings of a few foot-soldiers for the greater good: If there is real damage occurring, screw the "rules" and grab a bucket.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fire[edit]

But how often does an actual "emergency" happen? In almost every instance I can recall, the over-reaction to the perceived problem was the actual source of disruption. Emergency workers (and soldiers) spend more time practising fighting fires than actually dousing flames. The steps you have to do become ruts worn into your brain, so that when you are actually required to think about a novel situation, you've got the capacity to do so. The policies and guidelines are similar: If we do things the way we "always do them" we will be able to concentrate on the actual issues and ignore the noise of process.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Give the dog a bone[edit]

So, for myself, when faced with a XfD question , I look over several factors. In order of importance:

  • What's best for the encyclopedia according to existing policy. We don't vote on verification, for example.
  • What's best for the encyclopedia according to the participants in the discussion. This is "gauging consensus" and not to be confused with vote counting.
  • How has the process affected the outcome. Do I suspect debate-packing, is there a script being used, or are some of the participants more experienced than others.

When I contribute to a discussion, I make my recommendation based upon the same order. This means that I may have some dynamic tension between what I want personally, what's best for the encyclopedia, and what I suspect the outcome of a debate may be. If I want something to die, but see that neither is there a clear policy reason for it to go nor am I certain it would fail XfD, saying "Relist but I'll say to delete" is perfectly valid.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Balance (and checks)[edit]

In the end it's about striking the line between making everyone5 feel safe, giving them the structure in which to concentrate on the goals of the encyclopedia, and making sure that the safety net doesn't become a cage. For a very few individuals, these same structures are an encumbrance because they brook no interference with their opinions of what's correct. Speedy deletion, for instance, is a slippery slope. When we begin to delete things based upon "divisiveness" without any recourse, we're simply asking for whomever has the thickest skin to make "do what thou will" the whole of the law. This is a problem that we have not yet solved.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

1. I'm going to include DRv in this group despite it have a non congruent acronym.
2. The work needs to be done, but I believe that the clerk's positions are harmful. I'll expand on that if asked.
3. Interested parties might examine the cross-over between participants in those battles and the current user-box fiasco.
4. Leaving aside the few editors who've chosen to be the sand in that one's gears, of course.
5. I think that we should nurture trolls. Treat them nicely, politely, and with the same respect that we give every contributor. Then kick their arse out the door (ticking every box) if they don't come around.
brenneman{L} 07:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Hey Lar![edit]

Congrats on your adminship. And here's a pretty userbox that I made. Dspserpico 05:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:user Delta Sig

Thanks! I tend to subst these and remove the categories. DSP is pretty non controversial but I still don't want to enable vote stacking. Nice looking box though, I'll put the subst'd version on my babel page! ++Lar: t/c 10:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK redux[edit]

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Merritt-Chapman & Scott, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Gee Lar, you're swell! ++Lar: t/c 13:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Image:Kisdon Force.jpg[edit]

(moved from Flcelloguy's page)

I think you may have unprotected this early, not sure. I just moved it off the main and went to unprotect it and saw that you had unprotected 10 min after I put it on in the last update. Or maybe I was looking at things wrong... PS you can answer here, I watch... ++Lar: t/c 12:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm going to reply here because I'm stubborn and have never replied on my own talk page before. :-) It appears that you didn't update the template until 21:34, the exact time I unprotected it. Thus, when I checked the category of protected page images a minute or so earlier, the Kisdon Force image was neither on the main page nor linked to any templates; as such, I unprotected it. Appears to be an unfortunate coincidence that I checked the images in the 11 minutes between your protection and update; I apologize for this and will be more careful in the future. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 20:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no worries. (replied here because *I* am stubborn too, I can't stand disjointedness) My protect summary DID say: "17:23, 15 May 2006 Lar protected Image:Kisdon Force.jpg (About to be used in WP:DYK on main page [edit=sysop:move=sysop])" though, so it should have been clear... Protection is the first thing I do so I don't forget, and saving the template is the last thing I do just about... I have done this enough times to know that I desparately want to automate it, I can tell you that. It's fiddly! ++Lar: t/c 20:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh... because of my stubbornness, I've readded your part of the thread to my talk page. :-) I agree that updating DYK is a long and lengthy process, having done it several times. I'll try be more attentive to the protection log next time. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 20:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Go right ahead and do that, but I'm only answering here, not there. What should I have done differently? This is a general question because others might make the same slipup. The issue is that the image went unprotected the whole time it was on the main page. Fortunately nothing happend but it could have. ++Lar: t/c 20:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, your page is on my watchlist now. :-) I really don't see what could be done, other than to update the template quicker from the time of protection (or update it first and then protect) and me and the other admins unprotecting images being more atttentive. Luckily (knocks on wood here), we've done such a good job on protecting images and templates that even if one or two slip through the crack for a few hours, nothing happens. (And such images will be protected sooner rather than later; the images are pretty much checked daily when old images are unprotected and new images are protected.) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection: List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes[edit]

I say unprotection tomorrow, late tomorrow. Not first thing. Let's wait for AMK152 and Caldorwards4 to speak. ForestH2

I say we need to ask Caldorwards4. The next two episdoes will be out in 2 weeks, and 4 weeks. ForestH2

Let's confine talk on this to just the talk page of the article. No need for clutter here. However, I disagree. ++Lar: t/c 14:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See how I did now......ForestH2

My RfC[edit]

I've just suggested that any admin who has six guys with 500 edits asking him to run again should have to do so. Thoughts? brenneman{L} 02:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno. What's the link again? I can't find it. I am starting to waver on the whole idea of having to be reconfirmed periodically. ++Lar: t/c 02:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here. I'm against automatic periodic reconfirmation, it probably doesn't scale. But I'm for something to make it less "Nya-nya, what you gonna do now that I'm in?" - brenneman{L} 02:43, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well after Cyde told me I needed to drop my "holier than thou" attitude ... maybe! ++Lar: t/c 02:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holmes v. South Carolina on Did you know...?[edit]

I took a stab at a better hook; your comments are appreciated. Cheers, Postdlf 14:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commented. ++Lar: t/c 14:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beatles 1969.jpg[edit]

Hi, the image was deleted on English Wikipedia per Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2006_May_11, but an image with the same filename was uploaded to Wikipedia Commons on May 5th which is currently pending deletion. Regards Arniep 15:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to come back to en then, in my view... it's not eligible for commons, being copyrighted, but is a perfectly fine fair use image once attributed and The Beatles would look much better with it, (that article lacks a picture of them from that era now) as it had it before. ++Lar: t/c 15:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

I need help with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chris_%22Bu%22_Dreaves&action=history

User keeps removing tags. Yanksox 16:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've warned him again and deleted the article. I have to go soon, so if he does it again you may need to ask a different admin for help. Good luck and thanks for your efforts on behalf of the 'pedia... ++Lar: t/c 16:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James W. Patterson[edit]

Wow, pretty awesome! How was that page selected?

I shall remember this day as the first time I made the front page of WP (sorta). Best, Paul 05:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

selected on a whim. (as they all are... is the article interesting? is it long enough? is the hook line good? are there too many other articles from that topic area?) It was an interesting article! Keep writing more great articles please! ... (see User:Lar/DYK) ++Lar: t/c 05:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thank You![edit]

Thanks Lar,

I am honored by your support in my recent successful request for adminship. As an administrator, I am your servant, ready to help however I can. (In your case, since you've had the tools longer than I, my best use might be menial labor!) My talk page is always open; should you need anything, or should you see me making a mistake -- probably a common occurrence -- please do let me know. I will depend on the good sense of the community to keep me from making a complete fool of myself! :) In gratitude, Xoloz 16:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ten Ren Tea[edit]

Hi Lar. You actually weren't one of the people I was referring to, because I didn't know you had deleted the article. (And if you did I guess you must've changed your mind.) I actually have been talking to people who make bad calls, but mostly to the nominators, because it's easier to see articles that have been misnominated (but still exist) than to see those that have been mis-deleted. Anyway, you've already seen my major general comment on speedies: neither being advertizing, nor failing to meet WP:CORP, makes a corporation an A7 speedy automatically. -- SCZenz 18:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did change my mind after the author sent me mail and I took a harder look at it, so I restored it, and put the comment about ghits on it... And your point is well taken. Seeing all the stuff in CSD makes you just want to go delete crazy to try to keep up (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=Lar&page= ) as it's a never ending battle, and probably that's not good, need to go slower. I can't believe I've deleted as many articles as I have though... some inclusionist I am! ++Lar: t/c 18:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User undermining admin's decision[edit]

Hi, just a heads up letting you know that user IP address 169.229.65.30 is now going under 169.229.65.35 in order to continue edit war.

Much appreciated.--Downwards 23:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a range block is in order but I'm taking this to WP:AN ++Lar: t/c 23:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alabama Sledgehammer cleanup[edit]

Noticed that you deleted that previously deleted article and warned the user. Thanks. There was related vandalism, to 1959 and May 10, adding links to the now-deleted article. That user also has at least one anon sockpuppet. See 69.235.232.112 (talk · contribs), which probably should be watched. I think all the vandalism has been cleaned up now, but it took the efforts of four people to do it. --John Nagle 02:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was actually 4 different versions of that, and 2 users to get warnings (the way I found that out was by looking at what linked to the image)... I would have deleted the image too but it is used in BJAODN apparently. ++Lar: t/c 02:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Wojciech_Bartosz_Głowacki[edit]

My pleasure. If I may ask, what did make you pay attention to this entry?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:42, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check my user page (I post my last name on it...). My father was born in Gostynin, south of Krakow. Plus you've been doing some good ones so thought this one might be too. I don't speak Polish myself and don't have enough time to take on more projects but find the articles interesting. ++Lar: t/c 02:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments regarding archiving/signing warnings[edit]

Thanks for the info! I didn't feel anything in the previous talk page was necessary to archive, as it was just a welcome and a suggestion to sign my vandal warnings (which incidentally, my edit on that page was a combination welcome/test page warning, and I did sign the welcome part). Future talk pages of more notable content will be most certainly archived.Alan 04:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heart Mountain (Wyoming)[edit]

If you're interested, I just added a new tidbit that in today's news (link fortuitously added by someone else) and this landslide. Apparently it moved 62 miles in 30 minutes! howcheng {chat} 23:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holy crap, how did it do that? That's 120mph!!! pretty fast for rock! ++Lar: t/c 23:18, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Ref conversion[edit]

Feel like doing marriage? I do them by hand and I'm feeling lazy. - brenneman{L} 11:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly do you mean? That article doesn't seem to have any references right now, one way or the other. Or are you referring to a way to convert the in-line external links to references? --Cyde↔Weys 11:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Err, what? When a statement in an article is followed immed. by an external link, is it any less a "reference" if it doesn't use that word?
brenneman{L} 12:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to Michigan's Adventure today, first park visit of this coastering season, and then to the Whitecaps (Grand Rapids) baseball game. I'll consider giving it a go when I get back if it hasn't been done. ++Lar: t/c 12:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't answered the question and I'm still not exactly sure what is going on here. I'm not trying to argue over the definition of references. I was actually going to ask if there was any desire for a tool that would automatically convert inline external links to proper references (something I've thought about doing before). AGF please. --Cyde↔Weys 12:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cyde, he was initially talking to me, not you, and I knew what he meant. I'd also point out that you have some unanswered questions and comments from me, last I checked, on YOUR talk page. If you don't have enough to do, perhaps you could answer those before giving the appearance of being combative on my talk page. I won't stand for incivility, or even the appearance of it here.
That said, and since you brought it up, I looked at the article and it has a lot of links that are just links. They have no tagging whatever, so at present, hand process of some sort to add them is needed. If you wanted to make a version of the ref converter that turned bare links into references I think that would be useful indeed, though. BUT, if possible, I'd like to see it have a more complex UI, one in which it presented each link in context and gave you the choice to leave it as is, or convert it, and if converted, a chance to add explanatory text so it was not just a bare link. ++Lar: t/c 12:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What? I don't want to have a bunfight on Lars page, but, what? AGF? I'm going to take this page off my watchlist for a while, as that response was slightly surreal and I'm afraid to comment further. - brenneman{L} 12:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brenny, please don't do that! (Your whole talk/user page is surreal what with the minimalist bauhaus collapsing sections thing being the only visible content when one arrives! I hate having to go there.) Just talk to me and ignore Cyde if you must. ++Lar: t/c 12:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA[edit]

Lar, thank you for nominating me; I was rather pleased to read your kind comments. And I've accepted, and hope to glean something useful from the process, which I understand carries accusations of being something poisonous at present. Rob Church (talk) 16:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles Newsletter 002[edit]

Issue 002 is at a very important stage... it only now needs some content. Please help! LessHeard vanU 20:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good for edit checking and for delivering, as promised, but I'm not your man for content, mate... There has been external news, Macca's breakup! Any internal implications to the project worth mentioning?? That's all I've got. Grin. ++Lar: t/c 21:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available[edit]

After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK refresh[edit]

Whoops, sorry :) I did not see the warning. You need to put it in huge flashing red letters for me to see But the changes made it and thank you so much for the notice! It's very kind of you. I will be sure to be more careful next time... BTW, you are doing a great job! Renata 03:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC) (P.S. I don't like to edit my own talk page, dunno why)[reply]

The KLF[edit]

I presume these edits [1][2][3][4] are enough for it to be official... Looks like I got myself a Featured Article! :) --kingboyk 04:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one mate. When are we going to talk via IM? Send me your handle and some good talk times via mail, will ya? ++Lar: t/c 22:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you[edit]

If you can stand one more stanza of my singing, here's how the last verse goes:

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails.
Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales.

If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate.

For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate!
♫Bucketsofg✐♪

Hope you don't mind[edit]

But I saw you say "That's hot" on a talk page and I stole it for my sig. Bwaha. Master of Puppets That's hot. 22:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I said it in passing as a joke because someone else says "that's hot" a lot... it was an ironic reference. Look for it in RfA comments, the user is "Mike someone", I think but I forget the exact name... So you're welcome to it as far as I am concerned, but you're not nicking it from me per se, if you see what I mean. Best wishes and happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 22:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I know it is originally derived from the "That's so (not) hot" of Paris Hilton fame. However, I have to give people who use it credit. But I'll find this "Mike someone" and ask him then. Cheers, Master of Puppets That's hot. 22:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well you're a good egg for asking! Thanks! If you can't find who I am thinking of easily, pop by and I'll give it a go for you. Cheers. ++Lar: t/c 23:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, can't find any Mikes in the RFA talk, and I'm too lazy to check back through all the previous RfAs. I don't want you to spend hours in there either, so I guess I'll just enjoy my spoils for now. :D Cheers, Master of Puppets That's hot. 23:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Mike Halterman is your man. If you check User talk:Mike Halterman and the archives you'll see probably 1/3 of the RfA thanks, little gifts, etc include "That's Hot!" because it's his tagline. I found it by searching via google for "that's hot Mike" and restricting the domain to en.wikipedia.org... 1 minute search! Works amazingly better than our own internal search. Hope that helps! ++Lar: t/c 23:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA nom[edit]

All right, I've added answers and an acceptance to my RfA page. I'll let you add it to the main one; my edit count has changed since your original nomination, so you may want to change it to reflect that. I'd have done so myself, but I'm on a borrowed computer that isn't running the Interiot tool correctly. Gracias. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 01:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. And you got a tough question already from Dark Mark! :) ++Lar: t/c 02:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whew, that was a close one. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 02:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old DYKs[edit]

Hi there Lar. Regarding your comment at Peta Holmes' talk page, I don't think you have bent the rules at all, because they were created at 17 and 19hrs on May 17, so there are still 14 hours to go until May 22, when the deadline is. Also, the message from Atlantahawk that he left my page, didn't affect me at all, although I can understand if Phaedriel was hurt by his characterization of her. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! - review me 03:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well I will bend them a bit if I want, I have selected others that were over the line. I figure whoever does the work (did I mention how tedious it is?) gets to do a little bending here and there. ++Lar: t/c 03:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

...for doing a great (and I am afraid thankless) job of updating the DYK box. Sorry if I messed up when I was trying to help - you wont believe it, but I missed the big red letters when I pressed Edit section. Please see my proposal to improve the DYK process at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Template:Did_you_know/Next. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey no worries. You're an admin, feel free to take a turn.... ++Lar: t/c 04:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another thanks...[edit]

for the birthday wishes! :) - Mailer Diablo 14:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mailer Diablo has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

Battle of Smolensk (1943)[edit]

Battle of Smolensk (1943) was nominated for FAC today. You're welcome to support it or to address your criticisms... Thanks! :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 17:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK updating[edit]

Hi Lar, that {{UpdatingDYK}} template I made is pretty useless ;-) looking at the DYK template history, I edited it when you had mistakenly left it in place. If I (the author) can't even spot it, what use is it? I think your updating text on the talk page is coming along, but probably needs to be moved down to the head of the Suggestions section for greater visibility. It's not something I would use because I obviously have a different sequence of updating than you have, but just a thought. I think {{UpdatingDYK}} can be deleted now if you have no objections, there are no comments on the talk page, let me know what you think. Happy updating. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:20, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I use it... maybe it needs more whitespace around it and the note left in a big textbox with a border etc??? ++Lar: t/c 18:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to differentiate it with asterisks, but it's not visible enough. The problem is being only visible in the text box limits the options for making it stand out - no markup options. More whitespace sounds good, so that in the typical (25 row??) edit box it's the only thing that's seen first. Plus some more characters to create a border as you say. I might knock something up. --Cactus.man ✍ 18:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let me give it a go ++Lar: t/c 18:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOLZ - U need MORE whitespace DOOD --Cactus.man ✍ 18:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lego[edit]

I thought you might be interested in this article on Little Artists. Tyrenius 02:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Known about these guys for a while, actually (the LEGO community is small and many of us know most of the rest of us so to speak). They've monetised their hobby much more effectively than I have (www.miltontrainworks.com to see), that's for sure. Glad to see they got an article here and thanks for the pointer! 03:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should get in touch and suggest a joint project! Tyrenius 14:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, maybe. They're rather artsy though, and are not averse to mutilating bricks, which is a big nono for me. There is also the "LEGO Certified Professional" program which many artists are in. ++Lar: t/c 14:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.sig[edit]

I feel myself getting sucked into simple bloody-mindedness here.

  • I don't want to end up digging my heels in needlessly, but I object in the strongest possible way to how this is being done. It's the sledgehammer approach, and it gets my back up.
  • I can see some justification for politely asking people to limit their sigs, but the complaints about "making discussions hard to follow" are just bizarre to me. Do we not use preview?
  • The condescention combined with the willful ignoring of the fact that people are using these sigs... Whose opinion is more important here?

Please send some soothing vibes my way...
brenneman{L} 05:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Far out brussle sprout. I'm bowing out of this particular bit of stupidity. I'm pulling my hair out, though, at the irony. I've been accused of not acknowledging the validity of someone else's argument? Are we bloody kidding?
<rant>
So one or two people claim to be having a hard time finding the forest for the trees. Must we dance now? It should stick out like a dog's balls that the number of people not complaining dominates over the number of people who are complaining like horseradish on a hotdog. I am simply fed up to *hand motion* here with pushy editing. What's so bloody wrong with saying "Here's what I think." and then stepping back? I mean, jumping jesus on a pogo stick, the hubris involved...
</rant>
I'm off to the pub.
brenneman{L} 08:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Off to the pub and leave it be might well be good approach. Someone else being brought in (someone other than me, since Tony and I have history too) might be just what is needed. Sort of don't want to get involved myself at the moment as I've been involved in my own little bit of unpleasantness and haven't been paying close attention. I could use some feedback there, actually. Offwiki might be best.++Lar: t/c 12:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very funny, but who could possibly make one out our calmest admins... oh. I see. Yes indeed-ee, email coming right at you. - brenneman {L} 12:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a better hook I think[edit]

"Needs a better hook I think "I was just wondering what this comment ment on the DYK page. --HamedogTalk|@ 10:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It means the phrase that describes the article does not "hook" the reader in to wanting to read the article very well, it's not catchy enough due to how it's worded, (and a reword would fix it) or the facts presented are not interesting enough (and the article should be examined to see if there is a catchier fact that could be used). DYK is not just a trivia listing... Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 12:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not Again!.....[edit]

Hi Lar/Archive 7. Well, as we unprotected the List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes a while ago, were right back on it. Users are vandalizing the page, way to much. I think that we should wait until about 2-4 more vandals vandalize the page. Just to let you know--I might be thinking about page protection. Look at the edit history. Anways. ForestH2 (discuss | contribs)

EWS23's RfA[edit]

Hi Larry! Thank you very much for your support of my request for adminship. I especially appreciated the support of fellow Esperanzans, as I know they have the highest standards of civility. Thanks again, and please leave me a message if you ever see something I could be doing better. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 00:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again[edit]

Thanks again for helping to resolve my dispoute over copyright and socialist international. However, I'm a bit sad that you didn't send a thankyou note for supporting your rfa, like you said you were gonna do for everyone who did ;-). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dragon695 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 23 May 2006.

You are very welcome. As for the thank you... haha (blush), well I have this note drafted that adverts my tool/project that I am working on that people can use, but since my project isn't ready I have been procrastinating and now it's way late and etc... kinda how you get embarrassed about sending out wedding thank yous when its a year later etc... I still plan to though... ++Lar: t/c 03:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

undeletion[edit]

I don't really need it; I just thought it would be helpful in the merge (I don't really know what state it was in). If it's that bad, then I won't bother using it, so it doesn't need undeletion. --Rory096 05:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Administrators open to recall[edit]

SPAM WARNING - quasi form letter follows! (#5)
I'm attempting to open the biggest can of worms ever. You've expressed similar feelings to mine regarding the role of the administrator, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the category I've just created.
brenneman {L} 07:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Status[edit]

Thank you for your kind words! --Merovingian {T C @} 01:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III[edit]

The May 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —ERcheck @ 04:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

/Image:Marvel_comix_destroyer.gif[edit]

You left a message about this one my talk page. I didn't realize Handbook images aren't allowed, so that's why it had to go. No one bothered to tell me that, though, they just kept reverting it. I guess new guys are expected to know every rule like the back of their hand before ever making a single edit. That may be a good idea in theory, but in practice it's soul crushing. Biff Loman 11:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point, and it's definitely a problem. When I was a newbie, one of my articles got nominated for AFD. It was quite distressing. --kingboyk 13:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles WikiProject[edit]

Hi Lar. Plan of action:

  • Get your RFA thanks out now! You're almost a seasoned admin already!
  • Finish your code to simply trawl the categories, remove duplicates (not remove from the categories, but remove from the output), and output tables. I think your code is not far off being able to do this much already? Note: We need a "GA" grade for articles assessed as GOOD.
  • Don't worry about adding any other extra whizzbang features, see next two points.
  • Moving the already-done assessments into the new tables can be carried out manually with cut and paste. We can do it collectively, or if nobody else is interested I undertake do it myself.
  • Mathbot trawls a tree of categories containing talk pages to produce it's lists. I've modified {{WPKLF}} with some conditional code I knocked up in my sandbox (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_The_KLF#Wikipedia_1.0 and Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index_of_subjects#So.2C_how_do_we_use_it.3F) and I think we can use the same code/concept for WP:Beatles. Basically, at it's default an article sits in the "unassessed" category. When it's been assessed, the Project talk page template gets a new parameter (FA, GA, A, B etc) which modifies the category it lives in. Every so often Mathbot will trawl the categories and update the list. Sweet, huh?

--kingboyk 13:02, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or... do you want to ditch our tables, and use exclusively Mathbot's tables? That would be fine too, as long as there's some way for us to include comments and some of the extra material we have without the bot overwriting it each time it runs. Anyway, {{WPBeatles}} has been updated with conditional code and usage instructions. Categories are currently red, I may attend to that in a moment or I may wait and see if the KLF categories are picked up by the bot first. Not sure yet :) --kingboyk 13:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my thinking... Mathbot generated tables do so with a template invocation per table row rather than just hardcoding the cells in. I think I can change my script to invoke that template pretty easily. So we could have a generated table that LOOKED like Mathbot's in format (including default importance as well). The ranking info, we switch over to using their cell colors and names, (and I add to theirs the ones missing for merge). I'll get a new category dump, run the whole thing, generate blank tables, and then when we move articles in by hand we have to merge where we have two partial rows or conflicting rankings into just one row. I saw where you changed {{WPKLF}}. As you say, we should change {{WPBeatles}} the same way. Except! We should take ALL the possible rankings as parameters, not just FA and good, because we have a lot of articles already ranked (I understand why you did't for KLF though). I'm hazier about that part but it doesn't have to be sussed for me to do a blank table gen run. It only has to be sussed when we ask people to go to all the articles that have it and add the ranking info. (actually that could be done by a bot... if I get this done maybe?) As for RFA thanks I was holding off because I wanted to advert that I could generate these sorts of tables for people. Let me see what I can do tonite, I'll just ignore DYK and IRC and work on this. ++Lar: t/c 13:41, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already updated the Beatles template to cover FA, GA, A, B, Start, Stub, unassessed, and "needs action" (nom for AFD, merge, etc). It might have been better to put the param for grading as param 1 rather than param 2, but tis done now, and I've AWB updated all category, portal and wikipedia articles using the template. As a result, all known mainspace articles - and only known mainspace articles - are in Category:Unassessed Beatles articles (all 574 of them).
Yes, KLF is a special case because there's no point categorising our articles as they probably won't make it unless FA; whereas I guess all Beatles songs/albums would stand a decent chance.
If you think what I've done so far is OK, great. But, if not, best give me a shout before I start making too many changes. --kingboyk 13:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC) PS I know why you're waiting to get your RFA thanks out. My advice is, if you are going to send them, send them now. You can promote your script later on by spamming the WikiProjects![reply]
I've made a few "proof of concept" taggings, for articles in cat Beatles letter "A" - see WP:TBA#A. --kingboyk 14:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seems good so far... I set up the A and B class category pages cribbing from the chemistry b class category page but referencing our scheme as well... see what you think. I am not sure I agree that merge/delete/AFD belong in unclassified though (maybe, but not sure). Also I think the TheBeatles Article template itself needs to do the "this article is tagged as class mumble" the way chemistry does. I am going to take a whack at adding that code to the template but it may be a nasty bit of surgery. ++Lar: t/c 14:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"merge/delete/AFD" aren't in "unassessed" (or at least they won't be, if my scheme is adopted and they're tagged). They use the param "Other" which will put them in a currently redlinked category that I plan to be a subcat of Category:WikiProject The Beatles articles and not a subcat of Mathbot's Beatles tree. Good idea re displaying the grading (although the category will appear at the bottom of the talk page, and our template is already crowded so let's see how it looks...) --kingboyk 14:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your new category pages look good. --kingboyk 14:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK let's have M/D/AFD be subcats of other or something, I agree they should not be mathbot tracked but I think there is merit in having them categorised separately. re the tagging displayed, There is space on the template below the pic I think... I have to suss out how chem does it though, the templates are different in that we have more parms etc. Not undoable though. I have downloaded the latest category dump in prep for doing a run to see that things still work before I try any code changes to move to the templatised rows (did you comment on that bit?) also, how to handle articles that have more than one classification??? It would be faster to do this talking on IM but this records the info where we can see it. ++Lar: t/c 14:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We have a minor problem, can you fix it? All the articles are showing up under T for talk in the alpha list of articles in the A/B class cat. Category:B-Class_Beatles_articles to see what I mean. Can we pipe the article name in after the category in your invocation? PAGENAME may not be the exact right var to use as that may still carry the Talk on the front, not sure. I am doing surgery on that (thebeatlesarticle) template now so let me see if I can fix it. ++Lar: t/c 14:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno. Your change didn't seem to fix it. If you find a solution please fix {{WPKLF}} too :) --kingboyk 14:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it did. Take a look at B class now. Where articles sort in categories is not an instant change, it requires a background process to execute which sometimes gets a bit behind. NEW category adds do take effect right away. Richard Lester is now under R instead of T. That's actually not RIGHT as he should be under L since that's his last name. I am not sure how to fix that without really deep hacking or adding another parm, I suspect we may be the first project that has a lot of names so the first to run into that? I will not change KLF till I get the article class tos how up in the box itself which is tricky... ++Lar: t/c 15:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(reindent) ... so DON'T run off and AWB all the articles into categories just yet... we may want to add a third parm with the category sort order, not sure... let me think. ++Lar: t/c 15:02, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't worked for Category:Unassessed Beatles articles, and the job queue is empty. Maybe you simply omitted that one? I'll check. AWB run already done for non-mainspace articles; unclassified mainspace articles don't need to be touched as they default to "unassessed". I think "R" for "Richard Lester" is perfectly adequate, this isn't a category tree for readers so it doesn't have to be perfect. --kingboyk 15:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it works. KLF updated too. Cheers man. --kingboyk 15:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I only did A and B, not all of them yet. I would not update KLF yet till I get the article type to show... ++Lar: t/c 15:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not worried about that for the KLF. Plan there is to keep things simple. --kingboyk 15:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like it! Looks great and doesn't make the template any bigger. We have a truly state-of-the-art piece of work there I feel :) --kingboyk 16:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still trying to get it all to align nicely. I wish I could force it to be the same size as the pic above it. But maybe if I make the background the same as the messagebox? Whatever, that can be tweaked later. Now I'm ready to move on.. have to do some actual IBM work though... Maybe YOU see if you can tweak it to make it just right? ++Lar: t/c 16:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a go. Hold your horses on tagging any more talk pages. I'm thinking I might hack the template to take only one parameter. Mathbot found our new cat and will run tonight. Looking good my friend! --kingboyk 18:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm tagging one of every different type for purposes of testing and of creating the right categories, etc... nothing more. Losing the tagging won't suss me, it's testing only. and I will happily change the tags to match a new syntax if you decide to. Note that you can use #ifeq (or the string equivalent) to test for certain values, or, as you did, use #switch++Lar: t/c 18:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What I'm thinking of doing is testing for one of the known strings, and if none is found assuming that the argument is a descriptive word. I think this will work because only main-space articles need to be assessed, and only non-mainspace articles need a descriptive word other than "article". It will also be safe to leave the template/cat/portal talk pages I've already tagged as they are, because the additional |x param currently in them will be ignored (I presume). Cracked open a beer now so may or may not get it done tonight! --kingboyk 18:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's gonna be harder than I thought. Unless assignment is supported (I can't find any mention of it), I'd have to parse the params 3 or more times (once for the descriptive word, once for the categorisation, and once or more for the display of the grade... unless I hacked your code and did the categorisation at the same time). I also have to work out what your code actually does :) --kingboyk 18:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm onto it. It's in my sandbox and almost done :) This is gonna be one hell of a template - easy to use, but complicated - which is how code should be of course! --kingboyk 19:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category list up to date?[edit]

Is the list of categories at Wikipedia:WikiProject_The_Beatles/Categories up to date? Can you give it a once over and fix anything that is off? Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 18:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't (the song stubs cat had been renamed but not updated there) but now - as far as I know - it's up to date. --kingboyk 19:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Lar/Sandbox2#version 9 contains the best I can do without actually fixing the major brokenness in my last version which is not working properly, i went back to the last working version to generate that table. Take a look and see what you think. I may hack some more tomorrow to see why getopts() doesn't work with hash refs across modules... something is wacked there. ++Lar: t/c 04:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually... the history has a version I can't generate any more at the current state of the code http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lar/Sandbox2&oldid=47350701 in that history version 8 does a better job with articles that already have commas in them than the one that is most recent. If we're goint to just cut and run and do the rest by hand... I dunno what to suggest. Too tired to think. ++Lar: t/c 04:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okie dokey, will look later... now that Mathbot has done his/her work I'll also have a look at that and see if we want to use our own tables at all. I guess we do but let's look at it. (Nice job by Mathbot though, very impressive!) --kingboyk 05:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I went in and edited a comment and a couple of importances in (to see what would happen) into Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Beatles articles by quality... I've half a mind to suggest that we move what we did so far into these tables, and give our scheme up as a bad job, I dunno. ++Lar: t/c 05:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going back to bed for a while, but I too will look at and think about this further. The author of the bot seems to be a very friendly and helpful chap, so I think if we needed any reasonable mods he'd try to help. One idea that just occurred to me is if the talk page of the article contained an invisible template or block of meta text containing importance, comments, date and username of reviewer it could build the tables just as we had them before, but automagically. Most of my best ideas come when I'm in bed so I'll sleep on it. --kingboyk 05:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the stuff I stuck in to the tables sticks, that means the bot doesn't mess with that stuff... we can just put the stuff in by hand, no need to invent a new carrier template for the article talk (although that's an interesting idea, I think he just goes off what categories things are in and leaves stuff that is alreadythere in place when he updates the table edxcept for maybe changing the article classifications). It would be a 2 pass process. one pass is to change WPBeatles template invocations to match the ranking (an AWB run would do that fairly easily if you had the current table open in another tab), and on the next day, update the commments (and assign importances). Maybe we transclude the table to where the current one is now? I dunno. Sort of depressed and annoyed at myself for letting the code go so long that I can't remember why it wasn't working right or how to fix it. ++Lar: t/c 05:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we'll have to see what happens/read up on it. I guess your description is indeed what happens. However, I think my idea would be better suited to the casual project member. We might be able to get folks to use a simple template for asessments, but have them grade the article, and then come back the next day to place comments into the generated table? And what about our non standard ratings? Our tracking of who did the rating? Hold the thought and leave it with me :) Chin up! --kingboyk 05:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC) See [5] for a test case and thoughts. --kingboyk 06:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The non standard cats[edit]

Kingboyk: we need to talk about these. I've created merge already. I want to create the other ones and I do want to have them set up as not something the bot worriesaobut but I'm not so keen on having them all in the same "other" category. A subcat would be fine I guess... Thoughts? ++Lar: t/c 21:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to change the strings the template looks for then (it's currently just "Other") and I'd suggest creating the cats as subcats of Category:WikiProject The Beatles articles. --kingboyk 21:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give it a go later. As long as you're not opposed. Your link is was red though. ++Lar: t/c 22:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let me do it mate. It'll be easier since I know which bits of code to alter, and you've evidently enough on your plate. Consider it done! --kingboyk 05:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Magic word help[edit]

see m:Help:Magic_words for help with magic words like PAGENAME, ARTICLESPACENAME etc. No magic word for "take the last word and put it at the front" though! ++Lar: t/c 15:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stalker[edit]

[6]. I don't suppose you could also peep though the bushes into MM3K's talk? - brenneman {L} 12:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

No problem. I used to update DYK regularly last year... --BRIAN0918 12:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihalo[edit]

Thanks for your comment Lar - the thoughts you expressed there are pretty much inline with mine, and the reason why I'd watchlisted the article whilst waiting to see how others (and in particular Sharon herself) reacted! :) Sharon deserves it, but with the possibility for people to object it turn could negative. I say give her another barnstar or send her a bunch of flowers! --kingboyk 14:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update[edit]

When you're not tired and stressed from work (because it's a long and technically detailed thread, and because I don't want to waste Oleg's time) please have a look at Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index_of_subjects#WikiProject_The_Beatles. There's my request for the features we discussed yesterday, a "but..." statement from User:Kirill Lokshin which is worth considering, and a promise from Oleg to at least look into it. Since he's willing to do that, let's be singing from the same hymn sheet. If he'd do even some of what I've asked for it would be great - his work so far combined with our new improved template is stupendous, I think. --kingboyk 15:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've been bopped too![edit]

BOPP'D![edit]

Steve has bopped you on the top with a mop! Bops promote not only WikiLove, but also steady loss of brain cells! Hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the Moppage by bopping someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, and help the chief Mop achieve his goal of world domination. And to spread the Moppage, just use {{subst:User:Master of Puppets/Bop|<you>}} replacing <you> with your username. Happy editing! kingboyk 17:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh[edit]

I somewhat diappointed in your take on the situation. I'm much too tired to get into it now, but I shall take you up on the offer to exchange email later. I also just discovered that little turd called CSD:T2, inserted (of course) WITHOUT ANY SERIOUS CONSENSUS, so needless to say I am not at all WP:COOL at the moment and fear I might say something not very WP:CIVIL (not directed at you, but at the notorious antiuserbox junta). --Dragon695 04:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red bellied Lemur[edit]

im a relatively new user who is trying to spend time creating high quality articles. one of my latest articles San Francisco garter snake was a DYK and now a good article. on may 27 i created Red bellied Lemur, and nommed it for DYK. another user without any discussion with me redirected my new article to Red-bellied Lemur, which was previously a two line stub, one line of which was not accurate. he then took it upon himself to strike the DYK nom, a behaviour that does not seem appropriate. thus i think the article i created qualifies as new. Covalent 13:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me look into it. The article that matches the right naming convention probably is the one that should live on, and the other name become a redirect,... and if it was there first, and was large, a dup name would not qualify for DYK. But if it was a stub as you say this one was, it would. You may want to read up on animal naming conventions, as I am not sure which one is the right name. (I am sorry I don't know the right page for that, if you find it can you remind me with a link?) I'll look into it and if necessary have a word with whoever struck the nom. As a side note, your efforts to add good information and improve the encyclopedia are appreciated, even if not necessarily always remarked upon, be of good cheer. ++Lar: t/c 13:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked into it and I think it's a perfectly fine nom. It needs a better hook though, can you delatinise it? Give the english meanings for some of the latin terms but leave the links pointing to the latin term perhaps? ++Lar: t/c 14:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for your support on the nom. ive re-written the hook. as for the nomenclature, that part doesn't really concern me, as wikipedia and the scientific world have ambiguous naming conventions for primates. i dont have any pride of authorship on the hyphen issue :). {besides lemur species, names and categorisation changes annually...it's a fast moving field). my issue was that user's redirect of a new article without any discussion or even edit note. his nom strike was rather rude as well.Covalent 14:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sussed about which nomenclature is right or wrong, just suggesting that maybe you might next time be able to avoid accidentally creating a new article. Doing a search for Lemur, or doing a treewalk through the taxonomy tree from a different lemur, might have found this article. No harm done in the end though. As for it being "rude"... perhaps it was, let's see what the other editor says. ++Lar: t/c 16:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA[edit]

I notced that you've made some edits on Cool3's talk page and though you might like to vote in his RfA at wp:rfa. ShortJason 15:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smooch![edit]

A hasty kiss while I'm on my cell phone ;) -- Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 16:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been planning all week to drop by your talk page, Larry, but for one reason or another, I've postponed it. I guess I wanted not to be disturbed; and now that I'm calmly at home, I've completely forgotten what I've wanted to say! J/k, I guess I have nothing important to say right now - except thanking you for keeping an eye on me during that unpleasant incident with Mr. Atlantahawk. Several friends jumped immediately to help me on that one. To you, my deepest thanks, Larry. You're my knight in shiny armor ;)
I've seen your kind comment at the Wikihalo nomination that dear Blnguyen has made for me; once again, you are too kind with me - and for the unmpteenth time, thank you! ;) I honetly don't know what to do regarding that. B's intentions are extremely kind, but it appears as if most people have a somewhat deprecated image of this prize, of which I must confess I had never heard myself. Kinda puzzled at what to do there. I think I will decline the nomination, but the sole thing that matters to me here, is not to hurt B's feelings.
Maybe I'll drop by and visit you again later today, Larry hun, I feel kinda lonely today. Kisses! Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 21:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I sort of have the same dilemna about that whole award that you do... (although not as acute a problem as you since you're the nominee) B's aces... I think just honestly saying you're honored that B cared but you think it best to decline (which is what you're intending to do, I gather) truly is the best approach. It's best never to live our lives for others, even in minor ways. You're always welcome to pop by here, or if you're ever on IRC and I am too, look me up. (you can tell it's me, I use the same handle and I have a wikipedia cloak so when you do a whois you'll see it is me) You've always a sympathetic shoulder to lean on with me although I fear my armour may have dents and tarnish in spots... Oh, and Kisses back, of course!!! ++Lar: t/c 21:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Have a mouthful of this![edit]

➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ awards this mouthful of Barnstars to Lar for the long hours and hard work put into Wikipedia:Did you know that benefit every user of the 'pedia.

Yeah, I seem to be running a book on the longest article titles on Wikipedia. It's because the subject needs long, explanitory titles, not because I'm out of ideas for shortening them. Honestly. ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ 20:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm... a mouthful of barnstars (sharp pointy things, they are)? Or (see just above) a kiss??? Let me get back to you on that one!!!! Grin... OK, I'll take both! ++Lar: t/c 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A big juicy kiss, Larry, obviously! As long as you're tall, dark, handsome and rich (like me, of course. Ahem). If you are, then feel free to nibble away. If you're like the rest of us, then, no offence, but join the rest of the queue ;o) :oD ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ 20:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Er, "tall, dark, handsome and rich" ??? ... only 1 out of 4 of those fit me, I am afraid. Fortunately I get kissed from time to time anyway. Thanks muchly for my very first Barnstar! ++Lar: t/c 21:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Belated congrats![edit]

I have indeed seen you around, and keep up the good work! RadioKirk talk to me 17:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 23:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say "congratulations" belatedly, as well as to look at JoshuaZ's RfA, which was up at the same point as was yours. --Celestianpower háblame 22:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... but WHY did you faint?... that's the question. :) ++Lar: t/c 23:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Naturally, it was because you're such a fantastic Wikipedian/person/Esperanzian that I thought you couldn't possibly be a non-admin. I was wrong as ever, so I fainted :P. --Celestianpower háblame 10:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats from me too! BrickWiki??? Grutness...wha? 01:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of congratulations all around! And thanks for the birthday wishes. :) -- Natalya 02:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are doing great, congraulations.--Dakota ~ 02:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congratulations! Sure I will, let me know when you do drop by Singapore! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 06:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doing excellently, especially with DYK. Well done.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! --Terence Ong 09:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! You are most welcome, and I'm glad you have this mop! And as for the little advert in the message, I think I'll add myself to the accountable admins category after wikibreak, its a great idea. Again, congrats. -- Banes 09:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and most welcome. :) Dlohcierekim 10:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best wish for your adminship.--Jusjih 12:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on WikiBreak in Hawai'i, but wanted to add my late congrats on your adminship. I have indeed seen you in action since you got the mop and as expected you're doing excellent work. I'm riding the rails today [7]. Hope your day i going as well. Best, Gwernol 19:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My day? Not quite THAT good, no... Make sure you get some wikispyshots! Lahaina-Kaanapali_and_Pacific_Railroad hasn't a single picture yet. ++Lar: t/c 19:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Thanks for your message - it was fun for me to have the myriorama article picked for DYK. --HJMG 20:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Blnguyen's RfA[edit]

File:Atlanticpuffin4.jpg Hello Larry. Thank you for your strong support and pre-encouragement at request for adminship which ended at the overwhelming and flattering result of (160/1/0), and leaves me in a position of having to live up to a high standard of community expectation. Of course, if I make any procedural mistakes, feel free to point them out and I look forward to working with you in the future, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 08:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK related to Parikrama[edit]

Hi. Could you look up Parikrama, which is a rock and roll band from India. I am suggesting it for upcoming DYKs. e.g. Parikrama is a Rock and roll band from India, which literally means *orbital revolutions* when translated. Kindly acknowledge this message, regards. --Andy123 candy? 14:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm flattered that you ask me, I have no expertise w.r.t. indian rock bands... however. I don't see it as a DYK as it was a lot more than a stub as of this revision: [8] which is well more than 5 days ago.... DYK's should be entirely new, or should be expansions (from stubs or redirects) that are less than 5 days old. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 15:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping me out. But, is there any particular guideline (or perhaps policy)? --Andy123 candy? 15:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed there is. See WP:DYK which has the guidelines. (although they're badged as "rules") Hope that helps and happy editing. PS Do you personally recommend the band? What's a good album if I could only get one? ++Lar: t/c 15:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes and no. Yes, because its only one of the few Indian rock bands which can be classified under 'cool' ;). No, because its old blues and rock and roll; I prefer garage and thrash. And for your information the band have publicly renounced any copyrights they might hold over their music. Their songs are available for free download on their website- Parikrama.com and also check out the external links. Regards, --Andy123 candy? 15:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Classic blues/rock and roll sound? Legal, free MP3s? I'm there dude! --kingboyk 15:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pesky stalker... I got my RfA thanks done, is the newsletter ready to go??? ++Lar: t/c 16:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I might feel guilty if you didn't chip in on my talk page not infrequently! :P Newsletter is good to go as far as I am concerned. --kingboyk 16:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My "chipping in" as you put it, is the only thing that makes that page interesting and worth a visit!... I only found 4 tracks at the site, did you have any better luck? They are not bad. Seems sort of art/progrockish rather than bluesy to my ear but nice... ++Lar: t/c 17:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The barefaced cheek! I also found only 4, but haven't downloaded yet. Here's another site with free, legal MP3s that I've yet to check out [9]. The guy in question was formerly the singer the with the Boo Radleys so these ought to be half decent! --kingboyk 19:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you downloaded Parikrama stuff? Did you really like it? Parikrama performed a year ago in my town. They are really good at imitating AC/DC. Regards, --Andy123 candy? 15:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)... I did download the 4 tracks that were available and I liked them. I'm not sure I'd call it bluesrock exactly but it was nice. Thanks for sharing! ++Lar: t/c 16:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: DYK![edit]

Thanks for the kind words regarding Time Is on My Side, but I should mention that user:Marcos2006 started it and wrote a lot of the content as well. I only really know the song through Vanessa Carlton's version, so I hadn't heard of Kai Winding until recently :).Extraordinary Machine 18:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re that recall box and your adminship[edit]

Since you tweaked my conception of an idea of Haukur's, I stole the whole thing back. And no, I haven't seen you abuse those admin tools as yet, and I don't really think you will. But then, as someone pointed out at your rfa, I probably won't because I supported you and am thus bound by that support to agree with everything you do. Therefore, please disregard our recent disagreement as a minor aberration in my adherance to that binding oath of fealty. Hmmm. Do you think maybe we should start requesting an oath of fealty from admins? :) Now I've put that out there that's going to take wing, I just know it. Steve block Talk 19:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfAs supports mean you have to agree with everything the nom does? I did not know that What about RfA nominations? pschemp (who is aces in my book, we're both LEGO community members from way back) clearly doesn't agree with me... perhaps it's because I forgot to administer the oath...
Um, probably any oaths of fealty would need to be to the community and to Jimbo, presumably?? I think we've enough of a cult of personality already without elevating 900 new icons! :) As for our recent disagreement, you know what, you were right, I was over the top. I was just very annoyed at DCV for messing up Rob's RfA (Rob is aces in my book too) that way and I just lost it. I should have realised it when I saw how fast it was going back and forth... that's usually a sign that one has lost one's cool. sigh... ++Lar: t/c 05:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your adminship[edit]

Whatever concerns I have about your becoming an admin are really minimal besides my desire for you to enjoy your time here and for me not to detract from that. This is particularly so because it was pretty borderline for me whether to bother but I do tend to vote with my conscience if I feel it urges me one way or the other. So I'll congratulate you on becoming an admin and hope you meet the responsibilities as best you're able. Happy editing. Grace Note 06:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I shall do my best to live up to the trust everyone has placed in me. ++Lar: t/c 00:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question Regarding a Recent Delete[edit]

I noticed you deleted an article that I had been working on ( Pattycake (erotic model) ) and that's all well and good. But just for my referance, what was the issue? I've seen any number of porn star articles in wikipedia, and I'm just trying to understand the specific case here. I saw your note of (nn bio). May I assume that stands for non-neutral? At any rate, if there were issues on neutrality, woulden't marking it for POV editing been a better choice? Bagh, either way, you're an Admin, and I'm but a peon, so needless to say I'll follow your lead, I'm just wondering what the specific beef was in this case. I'm sorry to bother you, and hope I haven't caused you any inconveniance. I mean, you like Legos, how bad can you be? :D

Thanks for your time, Lar. True Vox 08:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for asking, no inconvenience at all, happy to explain. NN means "non notable" (we use POV for not neutral point of view)... our abbreviations can be a bit terse sometimes. What that means is that the article did not establish the subject's notability. An IMDB entry showing that she has done a number of movies with wide distribution, some evidence of her notability on the web or in news stories by major papers or magazines or something similar is helpful. I wasn't the person that tagged it. If you think notability can be established, I can "userify" the article for you, that is, undelete it and move it to your user space where you can work on it, and when you are done with changes, you can move it back to articlespace and try again. Just let me know via a reply here. Meanwhile I suggest you put a few edits in against other articles, as well as creating brand new ones. Hope that helps.
And once again we have a great example of why the world revolves around wiki. :) Thanks for the quick reply, and I would appreciate a userfication. I also appreciate your definition of non notable, and I will keep that in mind. So, if you could just post it into my userspace, I'll see what I can do with it.
Thanks a lot, Lar! True Vox 12:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done. User:True Vox/Pattycake (erotic model) Good luck. ++Lar: t/c 13:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I'll get to work on it when I am able. I appreciate it. True Vox 02:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Vote[edit]

I just read yur comments on ANI re Linux, BluAarvark etc. I'm glad I voted for you for Admin, you've already earned the confidence I placed in you. Thanks! &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149; 19:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's tough to see how this can end well no matter what transpires though... ++Lar: t/c 00:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a peek at a few recently speedy-deleted userboxes[edit]

Hi, I hope I don't impose but I'd like to peek at a few recently T1 speedy deleted userboxes. I saw that they got speedied and I wondered (while they were probably slighly controversial) if they really met the T1 criteria - maybe you could add them on my talk page so I can verify it? The templates/boxes in question were Template:User Republican, Template:User organ donor, Template:User against fox hunting and Template:User cannabis. Thanks a. CharonX 20:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to help. I will look at these and if they are not too outrageous (the names suggest they probably are not) I will userify them to your userspace for you, all in one big long page called User:CharonX\deletedBoxen. Please advise if this would not be suitable. It may not be right away but should be today. ++Lar: t/c 22:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please add them there, thanks again. I haven't seen them before they got deleted, but as I said, I'm quite curious what of their content could make them T1, then again, this is the internet, and even the url www.GoAste.cx looks harmless at the first glance :) CharonX 23:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Please don't misuse them. ++Lar: t/c 00:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, don't worry, I won't recreate them or otherwise cause problems with them (though I might ask the deleting admins to explain his reasoning to me now that I have seen them - I admit I'm pro-userbox, but I fail see how they are inflammatory or divisive). CharonX 00:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if I caused any problems. I tried to talk with Tony regarding the boxes, but we came to no conclusion (our two opinions are too far apart). I did not know I was not to include the contents of the boxes in deletion review, I had seen it done several times in the past and thought it would allow users and editors a better judgement whether the boxes were inflammatory or divisive. Again apologies. I hope a good compromise regarding the userbox issue will be found soon. CharonX 02:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You caused no problems with your use of the boxes in DRVU, that's legitimate. I do wish you would have told me first what you intended to do with them. I would still have undeleted them and userified them for you but I now feel a bit used. It is terrifically minor so no worries. Perhaps a lesson for next time, though? ++Lar: t/c 02:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I had not really intended to bring them up to deletion review at first, just take a look at them why they were supposedly T1, but after I had talked to Tony Sidaways and seen the recent mass T2 deletions by Doc glasgow I had to do something. And well, instead of going out flaming people, I decided I might as well put them up for deletion review. I just had to blow some steam somehow, I didn't want to use ya :( This whole userbox issue is again getting under my skin. Sorry it turned out like that. CharonX 02:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) No worries... I am frustrated as well, although not for exactly the same reasons. You may or may not know this but I was on the other side of this debate a few months ago. But the divisiveness will not go away as long as advocacy boxes are around, so they must go. I see no other way out. ++Lar: t/c 02:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I didn't know that. I took a long userbox stress wikibreak a month or so ago. Maybe you are right. But I'm still hoping for the German solution - remove the central archive for non babel boxes and move them into userspace, while still keeping them usable as pseudo-templates there, allowing each user to run his own "archive". Gets POV out of the encycopedia and template space, but allows them to keep their boxes... I'm getting weary, its 5.00am here and I should have hit the sack hours ago... I wish you a good nighz, maybe I'll wake up and all is cleared up... that would be nice... *hugz* CharonX 03:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Beatles newsletter, Issue 002, June 2006[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 2 – June 2006

Beatles News
  • Apple Corps v. Apple Computer. A case brought by Apple Corps against Apple Computer, regarding possible infringement of a previous agreement between the two parties in respect of distribution of music, was heard in a London High Court. The story made Wikipedia's front page due to a nomination by our own Kingboyk. The story had an amusing second wave in the news and on Wikipedia; be sure to read the article on Guy Goma if you missed it!
Project News
  • The Beatles article has been approved for inclusion in Wikipedia Version 0.5, making it one of the first 20 articles to be selected and the first in the Music category.
  • The hottest Project page this month has been Policy Talk, where some lively discussion has taken place regarding the (perennial) question of the capitalisation of the letter T in "The Beatles". After seeking the comments of Wikipedian third parties unrelated to the project, the proponents and opponents concluded that the current naming policy was correct. The discussion had the added bonus of bringing in some new members.
Member News
  • Project member (and "co-instigator" of The Beatles Project) Lar was made an Administrator. Project member Kingboyk (the other guilty party) has been awarded a Music Barnstar for his contributions, including his work within The Beatles Project, and has also stewarded the KLF article to Featured Article status this month. Sometimes-contributor ZincOrbie has also been awarded a Barnstar for his work on the Badfinger article. Congratulations to all!
Issue of the Month

The matter of the article History of the Beatles and the History section of the main article The Beatles continues to concern various editors, including DavidWBrooks and Vera, Chuck & Dave. Suggestions, comments, or help with the task would be much appreciated.

From the Editors

The Beatles have been in the real world news recently, but work on The Beatles Project continues as before. This newsletter keeps you up-to-date with what has been happening with the project and, perhaps more importantly, what needs to be done (see the "Issue of the Month" above and the "To Do List" below-left).

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 003 – July 2006). All and any contributions are welcome. Just let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or start editing!

Contributors to this Issue

Dude![edit]

Hey man, anytime I can push arguably the best editor in the 'pedia towards grabbing the mop and bucket, it's a good day--in other words, you are very welcome. Keep up the happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arguably the best editor??? Hardly. Your kindness is, well, very kind, if a bit misplaced for I am only an egg. I do appreciate the thought though, and thank you again for the many nice things you've done and said. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 02:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lar/Archive_7&oldid=1160070930"