User talk:Ral315/Archive 20
|
Minami Ashigara and Odawara[edit]
Raj315 I am trying to contact you but don`t know how. I live in Minami Ashigara, Japan and am trying to help with helpful links. Why do you call it spam? Also I am 10 minutes from Odawara and edit a zine about living there. Why is a link to Odawara Living spam? Why is a link to a ticket outlet not spam? I deleted that.
Please stop correcting my link edits. If you would take the time to check them out you would know they are more legitimate than a link to a commercial cinema ticket site. Why do you keep that link? I deleted it.
As I know the area I am trying to improve the listing. To be frank no one here knows Enoura, do you mean the harbour area. Also Odawara is a gateway to Izu. Everyone knows that. It is also a gateway to Hakone as you point out.
I am trying to contribute but I feel you are doing your best to stop me. Why?
MaynardWayney 03:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Ziva Kunda[edit]
Hello,
I don't know, why you are still reverting information about this woman. It's not a vandalism - it's the same case as Fucking, Austria - in Fucking case it's german word with vulgar meaning in English - in Kunda's case it's name with vulgar meaning in czech. Why revert it? There were for example no discussion about it ....--Have a nice day. Running 08:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Template:W2(edit talk links history) I see you closed this proceeding a short while back. This template is very integral to {{Interwikitmp-grp}} and involves the various sister projects and is intrinsic to the goal of having identical documentation and links on all sisters. Templates and pages here and there, (with many 'theres' involved) have to be as uniform as possible. This was a very parochial decision. It will be appealed, as the template is necessary. The time saved in being able to globally replace wikilinks is tremendous. It's use is for converting existing text, not retyping same, and you can see form the number of category and template and template documentation pages that it has very widespread importance. How much is involved. Well the tip of the iceberg is Category:Interwiki utility templates, but that is but a beginning. Add in a lot of Category:Wikipedia categories matching with Wikimedia Commons categories, and Category:Wikipedia categories equalized with Wikimedia Commons categories I was off wiki most of five months. Best regards // FrankB 06:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
You might want to peek at User_talk:Alai#When_it_arises and discuss this with CBDunkerson via email. Between us we've hundreds of man-hours in this, and this outcome is a travesty. Else figure you need to clean up the pages on the other sisters as well. Good luck!
What an amazingly stupid place! All these bright tech types who don't know what a macro is! (See my pending post CambridgeBayWeather for why! Best regards // FrankB 06:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ral315#Don.27t_spend_any_time_on_.7B.7BW2.7D.7D
Please Stop[edit]
- Please stop!!! This will not work interwiki!!!... I'm putting together an appeal, but if I overwrite something you did from other sisters, the waste time for both of us is on YOUR HEAD. Best wait as I asked! Email me if you want/need to discuss waiting. If you continue, then pipetrick as this template makes unnecesary using
[[W:Pagename|Pagename]]... a waste of time this macro was designed specifically to avoid over and over and over and over and over and over... !!! Best regards // FrankB 17:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi again... I haven't forgot you so... by email (extract) look for:
- So I want to CC you on this pending email and assure you I haven't forgotten about you and your duty to discharge this W2 matter (eventually! <g>)-- much appreciate the patience!
So Check your email. Thanks // FrankB 18:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Er, I think you misread Geogre's comment on active vs. inactive admins... he didn't say that most admins were inactive on Wikipedia-the-website, but that very few admins are active on #wikipedia-en-admins. Cheers, FreplySpang 17:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
IRC arbitration story[edit]
I'm working on doing some interviews related to this, so I'll go ahead and write it. --Michael Snow 18:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Ralbot enquiry[edit]
Hello, My name is James (also known as User:Extranet on Wikipedia) and I was looking into running a bot that delivers newsletters and other press releases that Wikipedia users sign up for (similar to the type of bot that you own/run - User:Ralbot). I don't really have much knowledge in Perl or anything, but I was just wondering whether you can possibly give me some suggestions whether I can request a same kind of bot to what you are using or even help us out. You can reply on my talk page. Many thanks, Extranet (Talk | Contribs) 05:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I just stumbled upon the old Wikipedia:Deletion logs and found out that you deleted the whole archive, stating that there were "concerns over libel in deletion summaries". You also stated that you'd restore the logs soon, but it's now quite a while ago since you said that, so are there still plans to undelete the logs? I'm also somewhat confused about the whole thing in general, since I can't really imagine that there were a lot of potentially libellous statements in the first place, we're talking about trusted admins here, after all. Therefore, removing all deletion summaries seems to be a bit too much, IMHO. Looking through the logs and removing the handful of potentially libellous statements seems like a more sensible approach to me. After all, the old deletion logs, including the deletion summaries/reasons for deletion, are quite useful to have. Also, just out of curiosity, where can the discussions with other admins you mentioned be found? --Conti|✉ 21:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I see. The Google problem could be solved by moving the logs to Articles for deletion subpages (or others that are also included in our robots.txt). Going through all these logs and removing potentially libellous statements sounds like a huge task for sure, and I can understand that no one is keen on doing that (me included). Couldn't you just search for "content was:" type of deletion summaries and remove them, tho? I've looked through some of the older logs, and pretty much all deletion summaries that contained the original text that was deleted had either easily searchable words in it ("content:", "Full Text:", "says" or something similar) and/or started and ended with quotation marks. Would it be possible to just remove such summaries? I know that this would be more work than just removing all deletion summaries, but I think losing them all would be quite a pity. --Conti|✉ 16:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you help with some research?[edit]
Hello Ral315,
I'm currently in the middle of a PhD at the University of Bath, UK. I'm examining the way that mediation differs between face-to-face, video-conferenced and text-based meetings. You can get a gist of the research from my (somewhat sparse) homepage here.
Would you be willing to spare some time to talk to me about your experiences mediating? It'd help me out no end!
If you'd like some more info, you can leave a message on my talkpage or contact me via the e-mail address on my homepage.
Many thanks
Matt
MattB2 08:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
My RFA[edit]
Thanks for spotting the forum business, I would never have seen that myself in a million years. I thought that whole business was over, but clearly someone holds a grudge. Oh well. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 09:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]
...for the welcome. --MeStevo 18:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Signpost Spamlist[edit]
Hello, Ral315! Though I am currently taking a WikiBreak, I still like to keep up with WP news, and I would like to request that my name be kept on the spamlist. Thank you for everything! :) –- kungming·2 (Talk) 07:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Wiki Newspaper[edit]
Hi, I know you're the president of the Wikipedia Signpost and I am sorry to bother you but could you please give me a piece of advice, I am the Founder of a wiki and I decided on having a wiki newspaper. Could you please give me some tips. - | Jimwitz. Please respond here. 00:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
dob[edit]
So linear of you :P
—Adrian~enwiki (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost spamlist[edit]
Hi Ral315, though I have not edited much recently due to real life demands, I do want to keep up with developments here. Please reactivate my subscription to the signpost. Thanks. Mmounties (Talk) 
17:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
My RfA[edit]
|
Word of thanks for Ral315
Good morning (GMT time); I'd like to thank you for supporting, opposing, taking a neutral stance to, closing, suggesting I close or otherwise contributing to my recent RfA; unfortunately, I felt that although there were more support than oppose votes, the weight of the latter was too great for me to accept the promotion with so many not trusting me with the janitor's trolley -   If you have any further advice or comments for me, don't hesitate to post me a message at my talk page where it will be graciously and humbly accepted. Once again, thank you and I do hope to bump into you around the encyclopedia!
Regards, | |||
| |||
|
| |||
- At least warn a guy, I've been disincluding it as fast as other tasks allowed. [1] this will ease the load, but suggest you focus your AWB flights on mainspace and then talks ASAP. Didn't I copy email you on the self-substing method CBDunkerson seems to have come up with? If I didn't apologies, but that would be far less disruptive! BTW- If you agreed to wait, common courtesy would indicate you should inform the other party that you've changed your mind. Now WP is going to be the only sister without W or w2 macros. Why not go pick on {{Tlx|Tl]]??? Doing away with That AT LEAST would unload the servers! // FrankB 21:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
about the signpost[edit]
I would like to write for it. I have journalism exp. How can I get in?Quatreryukami 17:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
features in the SignPost[edit]
I was wondering if you intended to include Featured Topics, which are now functional, and the more experimental for the time being Featured Sounds in that beat? Circeus 22:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
W2--II[edit]
re: Please stop thinking that I'm picking on you. The consensus of the community was to delete the template. I am now attempting to do so. The discussion has been over for two weeks now; it is well past time for the template to be deleted. At this time I'm not concerned about what this might break for a day or two. Within the next day or two the template should be fully deprecated, with any luck. Ral315 (talk) 23:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't say anything about picking on me... but a head's up would have been nice. So far as I knew, you were giving me time to work it out, or appeal it, and I've been steadily taking it out. See for example {{Tlx/doc}} which I originated on Meta merged with commons, sortof... There's no W2 there, but breaking people's pages, articles, etc. strikes me as worse discourtesies to them!
Consensus be damned if your 'fix' is any more disruptive than need be. Think on the ethics of that.
Matter of fact, I'm trying to juggle hundreds of pages on eight sisters, I can't even get back to edits on WP:TSP as some new wrinkle pops up.
Just so happens I was trying to link the old {{interwikicat-grp}} for illustration of what was worse than that temporary tag, and your BLAST broke even that!
I urgently need to generate a list of cats affected or involved in sister sharing, and without a list of links I'm going in circles! (Try keeping nine sister's category schemes in your head, and their differences!) What links here, if stubbed in will help me in turn write 'TSP'... and finalize the necessary logic changes in {{interwikitmp-grp}} two different pieces of which needed set aside for the moment tt0 and tt1. And if that weren't keeping me busy enough, there's real life and all that family jazz. Not to mention wikipolitics on other sisters! Then you also pile on against W2c! (and have never given me an answer as to why you unilaterally decided to delete that, and so on.)
Best wishes, but you'd be better off starting in Interwiki utility templates and helping clean up the '!' sorted templates, especially the Meta sisterlinks one's-- so this (See the Green template) kind of collateral damage goes away fastest. Have you taken a look at Templates for deletion for effects of picking on these! It's totally bogus as a list at the moment because of W2c being attacked. But to eliminate W2c is really stupid. There is no easy way to make text or links behave without an abbreviation the local server ignores (and which the commons does not have!) so it can be ported back and forth and still refer to the commons. Needless, mindless, and foolish.
Hmmmm... I just came up with one work around... but some idiot will no doubt pick on THAT next week. You kids have no respect for not fixing that which isn't broken. This is all unecessary work generated for why? So someone feels more important? Go find something to feel important about which isn't solving problems --since your 'solutions' just make more of such! In the meantime, fix those Meta templates. Get the nominator to help--just deserts! // FrankB 23:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- re: I gave you two weeks, and I've been trying to deprecate it personally during that time. The fix is not disruptive so much as it is "a sense of urgency is the only way any major work will be done on removing template"- after a few weeks, things get forgotten, people get to other things, etc. As I've said, I plan to personally ensure that every usage is removed in the next 36-48 hours. Ral315 (talk) 03:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- You Go dude... Just fix the sister pages too while you're at it, (<G>) if you can work that fast. Don't forget the [W: ... | ... ] and pipetricks on cat pages and templates... articles and talks here obviously don't matter. Regards -- and has it really been two weeks? I need to get younger or something! I have so many browsers open, I'm spinning in circles! // FrankB 03:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
re: The Job queue is triggered when you make changes to highly transcluded templates- the system has to manually refresh each page that contains those templates. I've never seen the queue reach higher than a few thousand until last night. Ral315 (talk) 15:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I sort of figured it was something like that. You're okay for a deletionist weenie! <BSEG>
- FYI-- if you haven't figured it out YET, I put W2 and W2c into simple mode to allow substing. Don't mean to spank you, but if it's on a cat tagged with a link to the commons, or a template, and those don't get pipetricked, I'll just be typing my little fingers bloody making up the lack.
- I was using a text editor and just SARing {{W2 with conditional (i.e. confirmation yes/no) on the links. Mostly always yes, but for usage using nowiki's. Can't say yes on the one's that have a pipetrick, have to hand edit, but those are pretty rare. If you change either of those iterim states let me know.
- I'll see what I can do to get back over here ASAP (I'm currently on Meta And the commons) trying to stabalize interwikitmp-grp -- An anom unilaterally changed the perams last night, and I suspect THAT was the Que loading you observed. I posted a note on WP:AN and a template talk asking for help getting tagged pages by {{interwikitmp-grp}} into a noinclude barrier (i.e. WP:DPP), as I noticed the system totally lock in two out of three edits around mid-last-week.
W2-II-2[edit]
- re: Hey, is this template worth anything? I ran into it while removing W2 usages. It doesn't appear to be usable in its current state- do you want to move it to userspace for now, or delete it? Ral315 (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I'd thought I'd better bring this up with you seeing as you wrote it. The article states that six pictures were promoted. However you have included ten images. Whether four are not featured or you just miscalculated, I don't know. But I do believe this has to be fixed one way or another. Harryboyles 06:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
The Game (game) article deletion[edit]
An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Game. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Kevin S. 10:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC) I am trying to get this article undeleted. Can you tell me why it was deleted in the first place? I'm not an experienced user, please forgive me if I'm writing this in the wrong place.
- I agree. I would like the page returned. It was very informative and now i am playing The Game. dang, i lost.........Quatreryukami 14:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- DRV closed. The page was deleted because it was unverifiable, and without any reliable sources. Ral315 (talk) 15:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you!Quatreryukami 15:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- DRV closed. The page was deleted because it was unverifiable, and without any reliable sources. Ral315 (talk) 15:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I would like the page returned. It was very informative and now i am playing The Game. dang, i lost.........Quatreryukami 14:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
OTRS[edit]
- There needs to be more visibility into these problems by the community at large.
- What can we really do to contact the nebulous "community", though? David and I and others have been bitching and moaning about this at the slightest provocation for six months, but the project is big and you can only chat to so many people. Short of putting out quarterly Signpost announcements saying "The following seven areas of coverage are the ones that piss our readers off the most. Please make them less crap, we'd all live happier lives", I'm not sure we can easily do much about it.
- [original wikipedia-l post, 29/01/07]
It was one of those things that seemed a smart idea at the time but less so now. The problem is, the more I think about it, the less interesting these would be. We couldn't really do much bar speak in generalities ("our articles on schools/trivially-notable people are vandalism flytraps", "people subtly turning articles into hatchetjobs are a problem") because all the specific things are confidential, and the problem is that people have all heard the generalities before. It wouldn't make much sense as an irregular bulletin, because the generalities don't change much.
On the other hand, I can see how some kind of "these are the complaints we get, this is the magnitude of the complaints, please remember we're playing in the big leagues now" once-off might work - it's interesting to compare what people actually complain about with what we on the wiki percieve as being the big issues. (Very, very few naming conventions/national-spelling complaints, for example... we get pretty hung up on that with little impact on the readers). Shimgray | talk | 22:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello: would you kindly reduce protection on this article to include only unregistered and newly registered users? Perhaps a semi-protection will keep the vandals off for now. ... Thanks, Kenosis 23:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Thank you much, Ral315. ... Kenosis 03:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
When was this article deleted?[edit]
I noticed that you deleted the old deletion logs, intending to remove the summaries and repost them later. I figured that you'd therefore be able to answer this question relatively easily - was there ever an article on Josiah Kwokstradamus or rope theory, and if so, when was it deleted? The page of User:Wikisux piqued my curiosity - knowing when the article was deleted would help me find any VfD debate associated with it. Graham87 13:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Undoing Interwiki's[edit]
- <g> Congratulations on 'W2', but per an old AN/I post last summer, these Interconnected Maps categories were and are useful in the cat tree to keep the category schemes in synch, and linked to the commnons. We'll in fact soon be adding many more, now that I got David to get this put on paper, I need to do the same with the interwiki tagging if I can come up for air from interwiki templates. In any event, please undo this, and any others you may have done the same with in your cleanup. I'm sure it had {{commonscat1Ra}} or the equivalent and one of the Wikipedia categories mathing/equalized with Wikimedia Commons categories...
Reminds me I need to check with some folks why these sometimes reflect commons content and sometimes don't. As a Maps of Cat, IDEALLY, it will ALWAYS show ZERO PAGES here on wikipedia-- but like a {{category redirect}} tagged category give proper soft-linking redirects to the page in question. (I sure hope you don't make a career out of undoing my work! <G>) Linking interwiki and cross-linking categories is highly desired by the foundation board... ask any one who trudges through their wiki-day placing interwiki translation tags! Cheers! // FrankB 15:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Trebor Rowntree RfA[edit]
I agree with Dgies that a checkuser could reveal the ISP and city, which would be a lot more than a "hunch". I'll abstain until there is any outcome on this. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I happend to see my name written in and I am still confused why it was written in? Can someone tell me? Carpet 02:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
RfA & RfCU[edit]
There were a lot of coincidences there. It happens. I'm just glad I figured out how to get it straightened out quickly. Regards, Newyorkbrad 04:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost[edit]
What do you need help with? Geo. Talk to me 07:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Same with me - what do you want help with? I'd gladly help in anyway I can. Pure Oxygen 17:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've been curious about this for awhile. Already saw the note you left for the others, no need to cc unless you'd like to. ;) Will poke around and see if anything catches my interest. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Like I said, if you have any questions, let me know; Michael Snow might also be able to answer questions. Ral315 » 18:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi! I saw your message on JP06035's talk page, and I'd love to get involved in Signpost. As a former journalist, I've been itching to get back to writing lately. I don't know if anyone has signed on for the features / admin section, but I'd love to jump into that if it's still open. Please let me know. --Sue Anne 23:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Checkuser results[edit]
Simply pathetic. To see if I edited from California, the United States rather than the UK? Pathetic. But if Wikipedia doesn't want me contributing here, I can leave. And I still misunderstand what a sockpuppet is. I would think that, if you created one account, you would be banned from ever creating another account unless you asked an adminnistrator or something. Guess not? It would be a good idea to add to a feature. Also, names don't show anything at all. Anybody can log onto Wikipedia and say I want to become the account Forest, Streamwater C. Would you block them then? (And don't tell me after a checkuser because that means that from now on any more accounts that may look like sockpuppets of Forest have to be checkusered) Carpet 15:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)