User talk:Dynaflow/Archive 3

Thanks!

Thank you for reverting 165.228.150.233's vandalism of my user page. I wanted to point out that there is good reason to believe that this IP address is that used by Zuberdam, now indefinitely blocked for vandalism. The two were tag-team editing the now-deleted Franz Krauth article. My bet is that this IP will be the source of more vandalism in the near future. ---Cathal 05:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I also noticed a similar edit pattern between that IP and the named vandal account, but I was too busy with various other on- and off-Wiki insanities to pursue it. Have you requested a checkuser yet? --Dynaflow babble 05:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have not requested a checkuser yet, no. You actually caught me just as I was logging off. I will do so in the morning, though, yes. Thanks again for your vigilance. Cheers! ---Cathal 05:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, looking into it further, it looks more like the banned user is using the IP address as a block-evading sock puppet. Take a look at WP:SSP before requesting an IP check. This may not require using the checkusers. --Dynaflow babble 06:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I will do that, thanks. As your anime friend says at the top of the page, "Just so no to sockpuppets." ---Cathal 13:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I discussed [[1]] this matter with GTBacchus, and he was hesitant about blocking the IP as a sock. He is going to keep his eye on it, and we will see what happens. ---Cathal 16:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for keeping up with the vandalism on the WJHL-TV page. I do greatly appericate it. Take Care...NeutralHomer ^T:C 03:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Canterbury University of the Seychelles

Good NPOVing. Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Yes, well, that article is just a hoot to read now! Delightful. --Tagishsimon (talk)

LOLCUotS! --Tagishsimon (talk)

Hmm. If we were /really/ committed, we'd put all of those unaccredited institution articles on our watchlists. Another day, perhaps. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Ira Cook

I started the article on Ira Cook that you fast tracked to oblivion, because he was referred to on the KMPC page in a list of DJs during that station's golden era. Some of the radio personalities on the list (such as Robert W. Morgan) already have extensive articles. Ira Cook did not, so I created one for him as he recently passed away, figuring others could come along and flesh out more of the details. You're welcome to kill Mr. Cook's bio if you don't think him worthy, but I don't see how it advantages anyone to do so. Obviously other authors of the KMPC page thought everyone on the list of golden-age personalities were notable enough to tag as links. --PBCliberal

The problem was that the article you created looks less like an article -- even a stub article -- and more like a capsule obituary (see Wikipedia is not a memorial). The sysop who reviewed the deletion request also concurred that, as written, the article would not pass muster [2].

There are certain standards for verifiable notability which an article must assert about its subject (see WP:NOTE and WP:BIO); even if a subject is notable, it must be possible for a third party to verify that in order an article to be acceptable in a tertiary source like WP. If you would like time to rewrite the article without anyone "fast-tracking it to oblivion," as you put it, you can create the article and work on it in your Wikipedia userspace before pasting it into mainspace, where it will immediately have to pass through a critical gauntlet. If you would like help in putting together a new article, I am more than willing to answer any questions you may have. Just leave me a message on Talk page. --Dynaflow babble 15:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

If in Wikipedia's view, a link that goes nowhere is preferable to a link that at least gives the reader the minimal information I was able to include, then it deserves deletion and I was wrong to waste my time creating it. My apologies. --PBCliberal

Telegraphs

You'll be surprised to learn this, but the hydraulic telegraph was real; I've rewritten the article for coherency and comprehensibility, and provided some external sources. DS 14:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Good. It was a matter of the sourcing that was missing when the article was created, and I wanted someone who knew how to verify that infomation to look at it before someone came along and speedied it. --Dynaflow babble 14:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Lincoln Courts

It can't be prodded regardless of the sockpuppet trying, as this shows. It will have to go to AfD, so feel free to take it there. As I said on ANI I have no opinion on the merits of the edits, they are reverted per WP:BAN. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

See the IPs listed in Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Rms125a@hotmail.com. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 16:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Irish neutrality during World War II

The article Irish neutrality during World War II has been nominated for deletion. Please add your opinion to the discussion on AfD. --sony-youth^pléigh 22:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Spyware terminator marked for deletion???

Would like to know why Spyware terminator has been marked for deletion, i am new to creating articels, and this is was alright till this morning, now it is marked for deletion! with a doubt that copyright may have been violated, system requirements section has been removed.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeshontheweb (talk • contribs)

Okay, what AfD (the process your article has been nominated for) is is a process for getting a lot of eyes looking at an article to decide whether or not it belongs on Wikipedia per WP's inclusion criteria (start with WP:NOTE in this case). It does not mean that deletion is immanent; just that someone, in this case me, thinks the article doesn't satisfy those criteria and requests the opinion of others. You are free to follow the instructions on the template and cast a vote to keep the article. You can also fix it so that the concerns raised by the nominator and others who may be voting for its deletion are allayed and they relent. If you have any questions on how to do any of this, I will be glad to help. --Dynaflow babble 09:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Would like to start a voting to keep the article, and i will go through the article once again. please notify me of where the article is going out of wikimedia's requirements a little more specific information will be helpful.. thanks a lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeshontheweb (talk • contribs)

Basically, you have to assert notability for the software. That it exists is not enough to merit its inclusion in Wikipedia. You have to cite (or at least convincingly assert) non-trivial coverage in third-party, reliable sources. Again, see WP:NOTE. Also, you'll probably want to read the other deletion debates going on here first to get an idea of what kind of arguments you'd want to make for inclusion. --Dynaflow babble 09:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks alot, i have tried to refine it with more external citations in the awards section.. will do some more when i get time again.. Rajeshontheweb 10:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

hi there, i find Spyware terminator article has been deleted already??? Please confirm. i had references from third party websites added. was it not enough? please explain.. Rajeshontheweb 04:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

another thing i forgot to mention was that the 'advertisement' tags were not removed by me. i just removed the words posted by a friend of mine which said your computer is protected and similar stuff. i just removed those personating talks and the advert tag was removed (not sure who removed it , we dont have the article now to look into its history).. Rajeshontheweb 04:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone deleted it out of process, as far as I can tell (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spyware terminator). I honestly didn't expect that result. I've contacted someone else who is more familiar with how to get things undeleted than I am and asked him to contact you, but in the meantime, gather together whatever you can to assert the notability of the article's subject. That is what will likely be at issue in a request to have the deletion reviewed. Don't worry about the article itself. It's not erased so much as it is just hidden. Nothing really ever disappears completely from Wikipedia, and articles that have been deleted can be brought back more or less whole if the right person just clicks the right button. --Dynaflow babble 04:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks a lot dynaflow, i had jeff contact me in this regard and i am trying to find out it he could retrive the deleted article so that i can re do adhering to wikipedia norms. what i didnt understand was after i saw that AFD mark, i had put a note for cleanup thinking it would atleast let people think that i am interested in cleaning it up to look more like a professional wiki article.. Rajeshontheweb 05:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks again, got the article restored, trying to keep it neat and clean. Rajeshontheweb 06:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• HELP WANTED : hi there, the article is under debate for AFD - 2nd nomination. there is a consideration for G4 deletion posted in the debate. it is still said it is not notable. would be grateful if u could have a look at it and consider pariticipating the AFD 2nd nomination debate. thanks a lot i am trying to contact badlydrawnjeff also to help out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeshontheweb (talk • contribs)

From what I have seen, you have not sufficiently fixed the article enough to pass the AfD, and I really can't find any solid ground to defend it from. It will likely be deleted by the sheer weight of WP:SNOW. However, all is not lost. I have put a copy of the article in your userspace for you to work on, without the pressure of a deletion review in progress or the disorienting effects of other editors futzing around with the thing before you're ready to debut it. If you follow the link from your userpage, the article as it exists right now will be there.

Now, how would you go about fixing it?

1. Read WP:SPAM carefully, because that is what the article still largely resembles.
2. For my benefit, clarify if you have any sort of conflict of interest in this article per WP:COI. It's an unspoken assumption that spammy articles often result from the articles' writers being connected to the articles' subjects. Having a connection wouldn't preclude you from creating or editing he article, but it's best to declare any conflict of interest you may have. This is the right way to handle a COI: Talk:Aglow International. This is the wrong way: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Higgs.
3. Look through other software-related articles. The "big name" anti-whatever software suites aren't good models for a more obscure piece of software such as the one you're writing about. For good models, browse through the more obscure Linux distros here: List of Linux distributions. Do note that a lot of those articles have the same problems as yours and they escape deletion mainly because they're free software and they have an influential constituency (Wikipedia:WikiProject Linux) that would raise a monumental shitstorm if an article on a Linux distro was deleted. Such is the politics of this place. Look at the better-sourced articles.
4. Browse a couple days' worth of deletion discussions at WP:AFD. There's no better way to learn what sort of content can doom an article.
5. After you've done all that and have a few ideas on how to change around your article and source it better, let me know, and I can help you a bit more. --Dynaflow babble 05:54, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your interest, just went to check the article on my userpage and it has been deleted as well. i think i might have to start from scratch. when i do, please keep an eye on the article and help me keep it in bounds. but the trouble is i found there has been few edits by others which make it look like an advert which is beyond control. i will still try to notify the users also as usual. Rajeshontheweb 11:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

McHenry Library

Adding {{University of California, Santa Cruz}} to the article was a nice addition, but McHenry Library isn't mentioned anywhere in the template. Shouldn't it be? Anthony Rupert 13:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

It's added as of this morning. --Dynaflow babble 17:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Crap-U-Made

• your creations are ill, friend. tomasz. 13:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I do requests. --Dynaflow babble 13:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Changes to College Nine

I removed the NPOV component because it may be incorrect but is not necessary to justify deletion of uncited content anyways.

Wikipedia policy is clear in its indication that uncited or original research should not be on wikipedia (and thus should be deleted). Rather than follow the Wikipedia BOLD, revert, discuss cycle policy and simply delete the uncited content (the entire article) I thought it was better to give the author an opportunity to respond or properly include citations. The Wikipedia deletion policy clearly allows for deletion of "content not verifiable in a reliable source," and there are no citations to evidence that the content is verifiable as such. Leaving it open ended by not specifying a date at which content should be removed if not cited would leave the flag and comment weak and unenforceable. In other words, it seemed rather a fair comment to me, certainly I can't be expected to cite the uncited work myself when I don't have the citations to find out where it is, right? Please tell me how I can be more constructive in the future; it was not my intent to be unconstructive or threatening, simply to seek improvement in a prematurely published article.

Uncited content such as this is inherently either not properly referenced research or original research. In other words the content is either from sources which aren't indicated and thus the content is not verifiable, or the content is from the author, possibly through living or working at College Nine for example, in which case the content is original research). Nuncio 22:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:OR prohibits original research, not uncited material. There is a major difference. An article based on original research cannot be "saved" because it is not third-party verifiable -- not because it doesn't happen to be third-party verified. The "Ikea College" line is the only thing in the article that strikes me as possibly being original research and non-verifiable, but even that may have come out of City on a Hill Press or the Fish Rap Live.

Gutting articles because they contain uncontroversial unsourced statements, even if "Wikipedia-legal," will usually be seen by other editors as disruptive behavior, intended to make a WP:POINT, and you will likely find yourself on the lonely end of a multiparty edit war (biographies of living persons are somewhat different in that regard, but, then again, College Nine is not a living person). The "correct" response to being annoyed by the article's sourcing would be to improve it. Google is your friend in this regard. Also, the previous editors of that article have left external links in place of citations (laziness!), and they would be as good a place as any to start looking for sourcing; almost all of what you're looking for is probably one or two clicks away from the article. You can find in-line citation templates and other useful tools at WP:CITE to add in what you find.

I do realize you're trying to be helpful, but there are much more constructive ways to improve an article than issuing ultimatums to other editors and then washing your hands of the matter. If I can be of any more help to you, just let me know. --Dynaflow babble 23:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Question re. Images

Hi Dynaflow, I hope you dont mind me asking you a question you seem the most experienced. I was wondering if you knew if there was a way I could delete some of my uploaded images without it looking like I did it negligently, ie without getting big ugly red boxes all over my talk page (LOL) You see I added alot of images before I really understood the wiki mentality to excessive use of images (esp. fair-use ones), and now feel I should delete some.. is there a way I could do this without it looking like I'm completely incompetent?? Thanks for reading. Sue Wallace 20:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Try adding {{Db-reason}} to the image pages. If you click through to the template from here, it will give you instructions. --Dynaflow babble 22:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

ah, thanks a lot for coming back so quickly, I will follow the link. Sue Wallace 22:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

BDORT article

Hi. I think there is a problem here that has got missed. I put out a RfC some time ago after I was blocked. Editor 1garden responded and got involved. Then later editor GDallimore got involved also. This is the history. They have both been making the same point repeatedly. Neither of them are my proxy - you can see that both of them have been making edits along similar lines and agreeing on what needs to be changed. 1garden just has bas English - but that's not his/her fault and maybe doesn't understand the processes properly. Also you will see that there is personal involvement of the two editors who are arguing against GDallimore and 1Garden - that have been noted by many neutral editors including arbitrators who have tried to sort this out and most recently GDallimore. Its missing the underlying problem here. 1garden is not my proxy. I did ask for involvement and he turned up; as did GDallimore later on of his own accord. It is unfair to 1garden to block him/her (I dont know if he/she knows yet). I realize that everyone is jumping at oh, look, its just that banned editor again behind all this, but eventually someone with as much tenacity as those very very obviously using this article with intentions to discredit will stick around and sort it out. So far real life harm has been done by the BLP breaches championed by both the existing two other editors that had to be Admin deleted. This is really a major failure of WP and open publishing. And no one is listening - everyone is just doing the 'most obvious' thing. Please reconsider that there might be something more here than meets the eye, at first glance. Thank you.Richardmalter 20:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I was not the one who issued the block on 1garden (talk · contribs). The matter has now moved from here to here, so post your concerns under your heading on that latter page. --Dynaflow babble 20:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry About that...

I hope the accidental vandalism click didn't cause you any trouble. I know that user is trouble, I didnt mean to revert your copy, I didnt mean to click that link. Sorry about that. Brianopp 04:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It's alright; accidents happen. Just keep an eye on that guy. =) --Dynaflow babble 05:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:UCSB

Hi. I noticed that you used a script to modify a member of one of the two sets of eccentrically modified versions of the .tocolours template design that I put together for use on articles related to several dozen western US colleges affiliated with UC, CSU, OUS, UH, and UA. I'm amazed that your script managed to retain as much fidelity to my original version of UCSB's template as it did. However, there are a couple things that did not come through in the new version, and I am wondering how to fix them. I am not a coder; I had to figure out how .tocolours worked by trial and error, and I might as well ask someone who actually knows what he or she is doing this time before I start tearing things apart to see how they work.

The two major things that don't look quite right are that the new hide button is not taking on the color of the rest of the headline text, though the v,d,e manages to do so, and the subheadings appear as they do on the generic navbox, with the lavendar-box backgrounds and black text, rather than with the clear backgrounds and grey text the navbox used for subheadings before. Please let me know if it is possible to make these things work in the new template format.

Also, please take a look at Template:University of Hawaii, an example of my other series of templates. Though it probably grates against your standardization push, I find that configuration works well for readers as their eyes scan down the page from top to bottom and left to right, and it's visually-pleasing besides. Is that type of template, also based on .tocolours, as amenable to faithful conversion as the UC and UA templates, which are all laid out like UCSB's? If not, is there a way to convert it to be closer to your standard while still retaining its layout? I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 19:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Judging from this, the script-based conversion doesn't work as well on the UH-type modified tempates mentioned above. I've reverted Template:Oregon University System until we can figure out how to make it work in the new scheme of things. Is there a way to convert the template in such a way that it collapses downwards? --Dynaflow babble 19:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The primary purpose of the script is to improve the code so more of the articles validate as XHTML strict. Along the way I add niceties as collapsible and v-d-e and using appropriate CSS classes to allow macro navbox management. Now as for the issues you brought up. Collapsible only works on the <th>/! cell in the first row. Because the link color is unchangeable (since it's added via JavaScript) and may blend into the background, I've turned off the autocollapsible functional. For the UH-type navbox, I've having trouble figuring out where to place the v-d-e. The collapsible isn't a big deal and wouldn't work without heading cell. Cheers, Dispenser 20:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. Keeping with my intended purpose for the UH-type navbox layout -- moving the less sought-after (though still important) links and text to the bottom and far right of the templates while still having a highly visible visual marker spanning left-hand margin -- I think the v,d,e should probably be aligned at the far right end of the bottom title bar. One more thing I noticed with the UCSB template convrsion while I'm here: The conversion script doesn't seem to make an allowance for centering a second line of text. I'm not sure exactly how to fix that elegantly, but maybe you could give me a suggestion so that I can do touch-up as you move through the UC and UA templates. Thanks again. --Dynaflow babble 21:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I've updated {{Oregon University System}} the font-size was rather troublesome to convert properly since you were using fixed units. As for that other thing, it seems to be a bug in the {{tnavbar-collapsible}} template as it render the left float two pixel taller than the right float. While I had know about this before this is the first time its actually producible. If you want a hack you can either change the font so the second line lies either in between or bellow both floats or use <br clear="all"/> to force the second line bellow the floats. —Dispenser 00:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the OUS template. It looks great. As far as I know, there are only a few other templates like it floating around currently, unless someone, somewhere, made off with the design and retrofitted it for his or her own purposes. The ones I put together are: {{University of Hawaii}}, {{California State University}}, {{California State Polytechnic University, Pomona}}, and {{San Diego State University}}. There are also the following templates which were done like UCSB's: {{University of California}}, {{University of California, Berkeley}}, {{UC Davis}}, {{UCLA}}, {{University of California, Riverside}}, {{University of California, San Diego}}, {{University of California, Santa Cruz}}, and {{University of Alaska System}}. If you would do the basic conversion tasks on those templates, I could probably do the touch-up work, using your conversions of {{Oregon University System}} and {{UCSB}} as guides. Thanks. <;font color="#285991">--Dynaflow babble 21:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

My designs seem to have been migrating. The second link I clicked in the United States education navigational boxes category was this: {{American University}}. I'm going to check through the other university templates to see who else is using my layouts, watchlist them, fix them up when you come around to them with your conversion script. --Dynaflow babble 22:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

They're all probably going to be in Category:United States education navigational boxes. I guess the six-digit color codes don't matter terribly much for UCSB's navbox, but there are others I have done with very specific colors. I have tried to use institutional identity standards documents to make the navboxes the exact, official colors of each school, and I have found those defined only in six-digit hex and in Pantone, which I converted into six-digit hex codes as well as I could. Is there a technical reason you're limiting the colors to three digits, like making an allowance for displays with lower color depth and such? I would test the color-depth thing myself, but ater de-FUBAR'ing my xorg.conf file once, I don't relish playing around my display settings again anytime soon for anything but the most pressing reasons. If there's a reason to switch the colors back to three digits, I'll change them back. The "clear all" hack worked to center the text in the second line of the title bar, by the way. Thanks for the hint. =) --Dynaflow babble 23:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The six-to-three is just shorthand, #ABC is the same as #AABBCC. I've gone throught most of the templates in that category expect for about a dozen or so, so I'll finish that up now. —Dispenser 23:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:California State Polytechnic University

As an alumni of Cal Poly Pomona I thank you for taking time to create a .tocolours template for my Alma Mater. However the .tocolours template seems rather dull in my opinion. I was actually unaware that what I was doing was similar to what University of California campuses have. I'm creating this template for Cal Poly and in the following months I will elaborate on each one of the categories listed on the template itself. Cheerio. Cal Poly Pomona Engineer 23:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I made the changes you suggested... and actually made look like UCSB's, and needless to say it looks good. I still need to work on the campus facilities' articles and by then I think we will have a very complete and useful template. Cheerio.

Cal Poly Pomona Engineer 05:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:Penn

Thanks ever so much for developing the template for University of Pennsylvania ! As an alumni of Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania I greatly appreciate you taking time and effort to create a template! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.72.24.1 (talk • contribs)

You're welcome. --Dynaflow babble 19:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:SavSt

Hi. I noticed you created a navigational template for Savannah State University using one of my UCSC-class navboxes -- {{University of Alaska System}} judging from the colors and width. I've customized {{SavSt}} somewhat for Savannah State by adding a template-space-safe picture, approximating the school's official colors as best I could, and narrowing the box's width to make it seem "fuller." If I can help with any further modifications you'd like made to the navbox, just drop me a line at my Talk page. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 09:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks like you're really working to make the university pages better. It definately refreshing. Thanks again.
Absolon S. Kent 02:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Academy of Art University

When you have a moment, take a look at the this article. Unless I'm imagining things, about 2-3 users (1-2 of the users, I think, are IP users) who seem bent on editing (and reverting) the article in a way to present a favored position or marketing slant. I noticed that this activity has been going on ever since AAU had (according to its web site) receive WASC accreditation. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 01:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I've been seeing that pattern on my watchlist too, but I've been too busy IRL (learning Perl ... whoo!) to look into it deeply. You may want to file a report at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard to give notice to the COI "professionals" that something is amiss. It would be better to go through that official channel than to get into a drawn-out editing slugfest with AAU's fanbase. I back your interpretation of what's going on, though. --Dynaflow babble 01:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

On second thought: I have been away from the City for a few weeks, and I didn't realize that AAU has embarked on a huge marketing push in the wake of its (long, long awaited) WASC accreditation. Whether or not he or she can cite an actual third-party source, I wouldn't be surprised if every resident of the Bay Area and possibly of Northern California now "knows," viscerally, that the "unaccredited" line in the article is incorrect and will attempt to change the article in a sloppy, unreferenced way. I'm just going to look up the WASC info and change it myself to stave off the armies of anons who will try and fail at being helpful. --Dynaflow babble 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

WASC's website seems to be fed updates at the rate of a hurried glacier. I can't find the official word, but there's a high enough truthiness value to the accreditation line to let it stand with the weak cite until WASC gets around to updating its list. --Dynaflow babble 19:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

VAE (Validation des Acquis de l'Experience)

I actually know nothing about the VAE procedure, but a little web research suggests it might be real, although the article's reference to the controversial http://www.sorbon.fr/ raises some big red flags. At least I don't think it's a hoax. I edited the article a little. --orlady 20:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The article appears to be what it says it is, a quick direct translation. I found a similar article in the French Wikipedia and created a link. --Gmosaki 07:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)--

Template:University of Hawaii

Move the school motto would look better below "The University of Hawaiʻi". The shade of green does not look like the one that is the official color. Instead of "UH" as the logo, use the new web-friendly official UH logo (see http://starbulletin.com/2007/05/16/news/story03.html).

Overall looks good. It is easier to read than the previous version. --Gmosaki 03:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the samples of your other work, the updates to the template, and info about copywrited materials. I had not realized that UH system now uses brown. Most people associated UH with a Kelly green, but that is only for the main campus at Manoa. I think that is why the previous person used the color he or she did (greenish). I really like your UC system templates. I think the UH box would look great the UH logo on the left completely left out and put a brown and with white letters with the title of UH system and the motto at the top. I haven't done any editing like this before, so I am not sure where to start.--Gmosaki 04:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I am working on the UH template modifications at User:Gmosaki/testing page. I want to put the brown box now at the bottom on the top and move the motto under University of Hawai'i System.

Thanks a bunch for the info and the samples on the testing page. The suggestion of using the islands that make up the state for the picture sounds like a great idea. I'll probably only be able to get back to work on the box next weekend.

I'm actually living on the other side of the state from where you grew up. I did live closer at one point. I moved to Ingham county to go to grad school in chemistry in 1995 at MSU and then moved out to Washtenaw county in 2002 to go to U-M. I'm still at U-M, but in a different program than I started. It gets pretty interesting during football and basketball season with friends from the the two schools constantly asking me which school I am routing for. My husband would prefer that I just say U-M since his father and brother are graduates.

UCLA again

I need help with naming conventions. So according to the talk page, people are really passionate about using the full name. There's some inconsistencies between sub-pages like UCLA Library and List of University of California, Los Angeles people, so what would you suggest articles be standardized to? Specifically, I need a name for the forthcoming "History of ____" page (people seem to like those). ALTON .ıl 05:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It should be the full name for article titles, for all the reasons I outlined during the last naming discussion, but redirects should definitely be set up right away to channel in searches for the abbreviated name. It should also be noted that, when spelling out the full name and then putting something else after it, a comma should follow the "Los Angeles," e.g., "University of California, Los Angeles, people." Even though it's not their fault, I will still blame Strunk and White for that awkward punctuation convention. I might actually move that page when I have time to fix its linking articles. Things to do, things to do... =) --Dynaflow babble 06:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

If that's the convention, then I'll do it, but it seems odd. Is this true even for well established articles like History of the United States? ALTON .ıl 04:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

"Los Angeles" is a parenthetic expression to "University of California," so it needs to be set off with commas. It's the same principle that would be at work in a sentence like, "The Cleveland, Ohio, waterfront is very fragrant." --Dynaflow babble 05:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Luckily, Wikipedia article titles don't have to follow every silly Elements of Style punctuation convention : ). I moved back List of University of California, Los Angeles, people since Wikipedia convention is to leave the comma out (see List of University of California, Irvine people, List of University of California, Santa Barbara people, List of University of Chicago people, etc). If only punctuation wasn't so confusing... shoeofdeath 19:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Starbucks

Fair enough. Thanks for the heads-up about the revert! Esrever 17:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion comments: NOPEC

I'm disappointed with your comments on the deletion discussion page for NOPEC.

There is no organization known as NOPEC; it's apparently just some sort of clever, little-used jargon term that amazingly rhymes with "OPEC" and means "everybody else." Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day's corollary is that "Wikipedia is not for something our consultants made up one day."

Yes, NOPEC is an industry jargon term denoting the non-OPEC oil producing countries. I don't know who made it up [for all I know, it was a consultant], but it is not new and is quite well-established. Here are some examples.

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/mckillop021807.html

"CAN OPEC AND NOPEC STOP THE OIL PRICE SLIDE ?"

It is clear from the context of the article that NOPEC means the non-OPEC oil exporting countries.

http://www.petroleumworld.com/sati07032401.htm

"Continued and sustained oil demand growth inside OPEC and NOPEC exporter countries, specially Russia, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iran, Kuwait, Venezuela, Mexico, Algeria combined with physical depletion and erosion of oil production capacities in the majority of these countries, ensures a tight supply context. "

http://www.clingendael.nl/publications/2004/20041100_ciep_vanderlinden.pdf

"It is generally assumed that world energy demand will grow, that import dependence grows, that there will be a growing competition among major net-importing coutnries and that the number of net-exporting countries will decline due to a relative shift in balance between OPEC-NOPEC producers."

http://www.sav.sk/journals/ekoncas/ekon203.htm

"Even though the high oil prices after two oil shocks raised oil revenues in OPEC member countries, they also gave rise to start the production in non-OPEC (NOPEC) countries."

Ordinary Person 09:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Main page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NOPEC

While my comments may have been somewhat flippant (judging from the timestamp, it was late and I was tired), I still stand by my comments' substance, if not their tone. The term is a neologism of vague definition, and the sources you have left on my Talk page merely demonstrate evidence of the term's use, not that the term itself has received the kind of substantial coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that would allow it to pass muster under WP:NOTE. The external links in the article aren't any better.

I was unaware that the article had been resurrected. I will not personally nominate it for deletion, in order to avoid the appearance of dickishness, but if the article does not improve substantially in buttressing its subject's claim to notability and someone else sends it back to AfD, I would call for its deletion again. --Dynaflow babble 02:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalSniper Application

Good day, and thank you for applying to use the counter-vandalism tool VandalSniper. I am pleased to inform you that your application has been accepted, and you are now approved to use the tool.

Feel free to download the program, and be sure to read the features guide, if you have not already done so. Please bear in mind that VandalSniper is a powerful program, and that misuse may result in your access being withdrawn by a moderator.

Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions, and welcome to VandalSniper!

Kindest regards,
Anthøny (talk) 16:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Questions

Hi,

I am an Assistant Professor of Information Systems at Boston College, and I am researching the development of the Wikipedia article on the Virginia Tech Massacre. You were among the top 2% of editors for that article, and I was wondering if you’d be willing to answer a few questions by email. Please also indicate at the bottom if you’d be willing to participate in a short follow-up phone/Skype interview as well.

All of your responses and your participation will be confidential. Please cut and paste the below questions and respond by email to gerald.kane@bc.edu to ensure confidentiality.

I appreciate your help on this project, and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Please also let me know if you are interested in receiving a copy of the paper when it is finished.

Thank You, Gerald C (Jerry) Kane, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Information Systems Carroll School of Management Boston College 140 Commonwealth Ave 326 Fulton Hall Chestnut Hill, MA 02478

Questions: 1) On average, how many hours per week do you spend editing articles on Wikipedia? 2) Why do you contribute your time and energy to developing Wikipedia articles? 3) What types of articles to which do you typically contribute? 4) Why did you choose to become involved in the Wikipedia article on the Virginia Tech Massacre? 5) What was your primary role in the process of creating the article on the Virginia Tech Massacre (e.g. copy editing, fighting vandalism, contributing news, managing a particular section, etc?) 6) How was your experience with this article similar to or different than other Wikipedia articles to which you have contributed? 7) What were some of the most challenging issues facing the successful development of this particular article on the Virginia Tech Massacre? 8) What do you think were some of the primary reasons that this article was successful (i.e. cited in the press, nominated as a “featured article.”) 9) Is there anything else I should know about the Wikipedia article on the VT massacre? 10) Would you be willing to participate in a short phone/Skype interview to talk more about your experience with the article (if yes, I will follow up later by email to arrange it). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldckane (talk • contribs)

I'll send you an e-mail later today. --Dynaflow babble 18:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Template help

Me again. I have an idea, but I don't know how to do it. Here at Category:Articles for creation templates there are too many different templates basically saying the same thing. I want to consolidate all templates into one {{Afc decline}}, where if you use that and add a word the message will change, like so—

• {{subst:afc decline|blank}} would produce -> Declined. We cannot accept blank suggestions.
• {{subst:afc decline|blah}} would produce -> Declined. Your suggestion is blah.

and so on. There's about 25 of those different messages and I want there to only be one. Do I make any sense? ALTON .ıl 09:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems like a good idea, but I'm not sure exactly how to implement it. I am also coming out of my second straight night of 24-hour-construction-site-next-door-based insomnia, so I'm not in any condition to initiate any experiments. Try asking Dispenser about this. He (I think I remember him or her being a "he") is really good with template coding, and seems to have an understanding of the underlying code of Template Space that I can't even come close to matching. At the very least, he should be able to point you in the direction of people who can put this thing together for AFC. --Dynaflow babble 13:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University‎. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.182.158.110 (talk • contribs)

I will take this copy-paste of the warning I left on your Talk page as verification that you received it. Do not continue your edit war/crusade on that page without gaining consensus first. The changes you have been unilaterally trying to make have been reverted over and over again by several different editors. Please stop. --Dynaflow babble 01:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

VT geographical location (and more on the edit war)

copied from your comment on another user page: A question on this revert: [3]. I was under the impression that the Alleghenies ended quite a bit to the north of the New River Valley, which would actually be flanked by the Blue Ridge and the Cumberland Mountains. I think the anon might have been right, but I'll leave it to someone who is/was a local to make the final call. --Dynaflow babble 13:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I also question this revert, and I have made a note on the talk page with a suggested revision. I'm also curious about your opinion regarding the question about the campus' newfound "notoriety". It seems clear that the April massacre put the school on the map in the minds of many people, as noted by coach Frank Beamer in this article: "People know about Virginia Tech now that didn't last year at this time." In light of this, should there at least be a passing mention in the lead paragraph? HokieRNB 15:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Starbucks

Sorry about that, I'd been browsing the WikiScanner (http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/) and it told me Starbucks had made the edit (or I misread it). I'll be more careful next time. One more thing, the link was dead, which I found out right after I posted it. Papre 16:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits

I understand that the guy was a sock, but the comments still look useful to the article. If you don't want them included for some reason, let's talk about it first on the discussion page. John Smith's 15:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I have self-reverted the article - I will review the deleted content at some point. I think a list of blocked sites, etc would be good for the article. John Smith's 16:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be an IP-editor back - maybe you might like to check his IP or something and see if it's the same guy. Dunno if he's on a floating IP though. John Smith's 21:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

MIT mergers

I am soliciting comments on a spate of proposed MIT mergers from editors like yourself who have made significant contributions to university-related articles. Madcoverboy 19:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

SummerThunder

I was looking around peoples talk pages (bored out of my mind) and noticed talk of SummerThunder. Did he come back? --Amaraiel 04:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I know what you mean with the boredom bit. I've been working on reprogramming a database for work since about noon, and it's about 1:30 AM now (hooray for the privilege of telecommuting on Labor Day ... bleagh...). A bit of Wikimusement is most welcome.

SummerThunder has indeed been back, though he's been more focused lately on posting his screeds in articles related to the People's Republic of China than on screwing with articles in my usual domain. I've gotta say it again, I agree in general with the guy's politics (against the Chinese government's efforts to censor the web, wanting to spread the word about various abuses within the PRC, pointing out that it can be a slippery slope between contributing the encyclopedia and obsessive-compulsively letting it -- or anything else on the Internet -- take a huge chunk out of your IRL productivity, etc.). However, the way he promotes his views is just so obnoxious, strident, and uncompromising that I can't see any way he could make a net positive contribution here, barring some kind of Come to Zuul-type conversion experience.

SummerThunder's LTA page has recently been updated: Wikipedia:Long term abuse/SummerThunder. Peruse it if you'd like. If you see him at "work," remember -- just report and revert. Don't pick any fights with the guy. He seems to enjoy those.

It's good to see you back. I was wondering what had become of you. --Dynaflow babble 08:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

You really need to archive your talk page. It's getting pretty bad my friend. I'm dealing with school right now among other things but most of my classes are during the day and I can have the afternoon to myself. Anyway, good to see you again, hoping you wouldn't be bonked for too long. BTW, did your RfA pass?

-Amaraiel 14:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

WP meetup

	In the area? You're invited to
	San Francisco Meetup 3
	Date: September 16th, 2007
	Place: Yerba Buena Gardens, 3pm
	San Francisco Meetup 2

-- phoebe/(talk) 07:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for Adminship

I put forth a request for adminship and even got a chance to reference something you once told me after the incident at The Virginia Tech Shooting Page. If your online anymore, It would be great if you would add your opinion. --Amaraiel 21:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey!

I just saw you on Recent Changes! How often are you going to be on --Amaraiel 15:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Our boy is back, it seems

Hey, I like that Wikitan graphic on your talk page. Anyway, User:Tuand029 has been making amusing edits to WP:ANI. Funny, I'm stalking him, ha ha! Just a heads up. Inspector Lee 21:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

So I've seen. I actually swatted one of his sockpuppets this morning and another just now. --Dynaflow babble 06:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:ChoSh.jpg

I respect your cautious approach, but inane application of policy does not trump common sense. I won't undo my edit, however I won't revert if you choose to do so. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 07:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review

Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but your last comment at the deletion review seems nonsense. Of course PUI would have been the best first step, perhaps that was the reason why the image actually was listed at PUI before deletion. So there was no incorrect deletion per process at all. Either way I am glad you got conformation that it was not a public domain image, I do hate wrongly deleting images. Now you also know what editors dealing with copyright problems are always encountering. Garion96 (talk) 18:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Now that I look at it again, it was a little bit bizarre of me to say that. I've been working 15-hour days and not sleeping nearly as much as I should, hopping on Wikipedia when I absolutely can't stand one more minute of computer-mediated database-program-fixin' drudgery. In my fatigued state, my brain didn't make a couple of essential connections and interpreted Dhartung's second comment as implying the image hadn't been vetted through WP:PUI, even though I had seen its entry there just a day or two earlier and had actually linked to a diff from it. If you detected an accusatory tone in my comment, none was intended. Sorry for my confusion. --Dynaflow babble 04:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the clarification. Garion96 (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities 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 for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! -- Noetic Sage 19:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your Invitation

Thank you for letting me know. Please see the response on my talk page Rktect 22:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities 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 for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)