This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kingboyk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 18 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
I started plowing through the dates going as far as I could (for the prior days) and manually tagging all the article for the Egyptians & Greeks and so on for these people that have lived BC. What I now do with AWB (semi-automatically thank god it'S there) is that I open in IE a list (see User:Lincher/AWB) of people that died in 2006 and also open the diff with AWB in order to have the article page and the talk page open at the same time and manually check if the article is Stub, Start etc. and Low, Mid etc. I started with 2006 and will go down 2005, 2004 and so on until all the articles are tagged.
PS Once the articles are all tagged we will ask people to request comments (so we will give constructive comments to pages that have active users working on them instead of just giving comments and not getting anything out of it). Maybe a post on Community portal would be the best solution to ask people to collaborate with the project once the tagging is all done. Lincher14:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Wow! Most impressive, that's great work you're doing - thanks for letting me know.
PS. I disagree with the tagging of Stub categorized articles as stubs especially for articles where almost nothing is known and in that way there is a need to see and check every articles there is. Anyway if I come across a start article mistagged as a stub, I will change it. Lincher14:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but there are masses of very low quality, low importance articles which we probably can't get to for months. My idea is to assign them to stub class but to tag them with auto=yes which puts up a massive notice saying "this has been automatically assessed" and inviting editors to check if the assessment is correct. I think this will result in a lot of extra assessments, but we don't know unless we try it :) Also, articles tagged that way will get put into a category - Category:Automatically assessed biography articles so we can keep an eye on it and trawl through them.
From what I've seen 99% of stub-tagged articles really are stub or start class, and most won't get into Wikipedia 1.0. Of the 1% or so which are B-class (or better??) I think they'll be picked up on pretty quickly. Anyway, I'll give it a go with a test run and see how it goes (once I've worked out how to use the advanced find/replace in AWB, or written a plugin to do it). --kingboyk14:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Fantastic. Didn't know about the auto thingy so wasn't aware of the other category and all that.
Minor point, I have also been tagging articles with class=Dab when the article is a disambiguation altough this category doesn't seem to be picked up by the general assessment for WP1.0. Is it normal, do we want to exclude DAB for the moment? Lincher14:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Dab pages aren't picked up as they're irrelevant to Wikipedia 1.0. Wikipedia 1.0 is about articles, no more no less :) --kingboyk09:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't reply before - my internet stopped working shortly after I messaged you last night. (My comment about the wikicookie was written immediately after the comment about WPBeatles, and you can see the length of time it took to get that posted to your page :)). Answer as above. --kingboyk09:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Beatles skip argument
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Working with those exceptions and everything about coding is a bit to overwhelming for me know. I love assessing but can't really manage to do all that I want with the AWB so I go at turtle-speed. I will just ignore these articles since the AWB-bot isn't on automode. Lincher20:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether the lyrics fall under fair use? However, on the Get Back page I've added a link to google which searches for Beatles Get Back lyrics. I don't see how he can object to this, what do you think??
BTW, I'll take care of the military stubs, as I can also tag with the appropriate MILHIST tag and task force, etc... plange01:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Okie dokie. I'm on a go slow at the moment, had computer problems yesterday and I'm waiting for programming inspiration to hit. Hopefully today will be more productive! --kingboyk09:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
WPBiography work group
I noticed that you voted for the creation of one of the suggested new work groups on WPBiography page. The main work group that we wish to create is Science & Academia (or a variant of that name) that would include scientists, mathematicians, academics, philosophers, inventors, and possibly explorers. Your vote in support of this creation would be much appreciated. 03:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Alive and well.
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello mate. Sorry to cause such alarm with the disappearing trick, I didn't mean it to be so sudden. I'm fine actually - let's just say I had to abandon the palpable greater good of Wikipedia and KLF (with its strangely addictive allure) in order to meet many immediate responsibilities. I can say with no exageration that our creative work together was most richly rewarding, and the work was wholly liberating and pivotal for me. For this I owe you heartfelt thanks for the companionship. My ability to attend to the project is at the mercy of that most precious of resources: time. In the meantime the stewardship of the good ship WP:KLF remains solely in your able hands, old bean. :-) --Vinoir17:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Admin help
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I'd try to avoid getting involved if I were you. This is an open site and personality clashes are inevitible. If anyone is breaking rules such as WP:OWN report it at WP:ANI otherwise just advise trying to work together, mediation, etc etc. --kingboyk09:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I'll be willing to do any time-consuming grunt work that remains after you can do what you can (I'm not sure just how good those admin powers are tbh), if you tell me what still needs done.
In all honesty, I don't know why you didn't suggest that to me in the first place!! ;) :P
--Mal00:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Lol Mal, you're right! If I had any wits about me I would have suggested it several times :P rofl
Fix any broken links that I didn't fix (I fixed most but not all; the broken links will be easy to spot because they'll be red, I deleted the redirects in most cases)
Check what links here for your main pages (project page, assessment etc). I've left a few redirects in place, you'll want to fix the links to those redirects and then ask me to delete any unneeded redirects when they have no incoming links
Create newly named categories and move your pages into them, then ask me to delete the old categories when empty
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello. I am Sylvia. I noticed you removed the fake new messages box on User:Bethicalyna's page. Alex reverted it. Please do not remove pranks or jokes unless permission under the legal forces of the user. Thank you for expirementing though and happy editing! --Sylvia01:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for letting me know it's been reverted, and if you know of any other user pages with this annoyance I'd be happy to hear about them. We're here to build an encyclopedia, not to play pranks on other editors and to lead them to believe they have new messages when in fact they don't. PS: No legal threats please, that's a blockable offence. --kingboyk08:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay. Please reply on my talk page. It's easier for me (unless it is easier for you to reply on your talk page, I'll just look at your's for replies to my messages). What I meant by "Please do not remove pranks or jokes unless permission under the legal forces of the user" I meant you should ask the user before removing things they put on. Thanks. --Sylvia22:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Administrative help on a deleted article
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I hope the fact that I am not using my wikipedia account matters, and if it does, I'll have two fix my Ip address to it, but I was wondering if you could bring back the Second Wizarding War article for Harry Potter. Many thanks.71.99.110.703:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Looks like it got moved to Second War (Harry Potter). If you have a Wikipedia account I'd prefer to leave a copy there than at an IP, so please let me know. I'm happy to do it though, as long as you don't use the material to repost the article :) --kingboyk08:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
AWB Question
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I've been using alphachimpbot to tag talk pages, but I've noticed that it has been skipping blank pages. Is there a way to configure AWB to still prepend a message to a non-existant talk page? Thanks. alphaChimplaudare03:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
I'm electing to disagree with the downgrade you made in importance re: the Trees' Sleep Convention article. When we talk about "importance" in Wikipedia, we're not talking about how the album did commercially. We're talking about how the information in the album's article lends itself to the overall picture one can gather about the musical artist who recorded and released said album via this site. I know that Sleep Convention didn't do boffo business, but the article describing it is very vital to completing one's comprehension of Trees' career and so I feel very strongly that the article is of high importance. (Krushsister04:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC))
Hi, thanks for the message. Actually, you are under a misapprehension about the importance parameter (I should know, I programmed the functionality into the album template!). Importance is importance to the WikiProject not importance in that band's career. So, if the album article were in a Trees WikiProject, it would be High or Top importance. In a general album enyclopedia, it's imho low - an unsuccessful album by a highly obscure band. --kingboyk09:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
But the way I understood it was that Wiki "importance" had nothing to do with recognizability from your average music fan's perspective, but rather on the information the article imparts. And sure, that's in relevance to what kind of overall picture one can deduce about the artist based on the album, but I don't think you can simply just metaphorically throw the album away because it wasn't a blockbuster seller. I mean, we are talking about what kind of information the article conveys, not how successful it was, right? Because I understood the import to be relevant to the article's content, which I can't connect to how many units sold the focus of the article actually sold.
p.s.: "Success" can be defined in numerous ways. For those of us who are real devotees of the New Wave musical genre, Sleep Convention IS a success in that it's a beloved album that we are happy to add to or have in our collection. It managed to secure a rave review from Ira Robbins of the Trouser Press. And no fewer than SIX of its tracks have been featured Songs Of The Week on the New Wave Outpost website, which has to be some kind of record. So it may not be viewed as a successful album to The Great Unwashed, but to those of us who are true blue New Wave fans, it's a synthpop-flavored album of note. (Krushsister11:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC))
Lol, exactly, you're a fan. Start a New Wave WikiProject and you can assess it as High importance within that Project. And, no, we're not talking about the information conveyed by the article - that's in the class= parameter. Importance= is the importance to the WikiProject, how necessary the article is to an enyclopedia of albums. Now, given that no other article links to it other than Trees (band) - yes, that's right zero links - I think we can safely assume that only fans of that band care about it. That makes it unimportant, right? --kingboyk11:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
PS By the way - if you remain quite adamant in your opinion, and I remain adamant in mine, (which is fine by the way and c'est la vie) I'd suggest asking for outside opinions at the Albums WikiProject. Perhaps they'll side with you, who knows :) --kingboyk08:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
No, actually I get your point now. "Importance" as far as the Albums WikiProject is concerned is not relevant to the artist who performed said album but rather to all albums overall. Oh, okay. Now I know why you rated it "low importance". You did give me a really great idea re: starting up the New Wave Wikiproject. I wonder if there are enough New Wave fans on this thing to make such a thing viable. I feel like I'm in the minority here because of my adoration of the New Wave musical genre. (Krushsister02:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC))
RfA message
Latest comment: 18 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
I haven't watched it, was what I meant :) I certainly don't mean to cause any offence - should I watch it?? You've intrigued me now!
RFA thanks are always welcome around here, although I'd probably prefer text. I'm sorry - and very surprised - you didn't make it by the way. --kingboyk10:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Like any contribution here, it has no strings attached. You can do with it what you will :-)
Having been following RfAs for a while now, I'm not surprised about the result. In a big bureaucracy, change is always fiercely resisted, and video is much more important than many people here realise. Perhaps some are frightened by what I have already achieved as a humble editor. I was originally planning a later RfA, having resolved these issues in advance, but everyone I have worked with closely supported me, and I am not afraid of an RfA :-) Stephen B Streater11:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I'm not very fond of the word "aftermath". It implies that the single had more of a cultural impact much like "legacy" which it didn't. I propose "Reactions" instead what do you think? CG18:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
"Reactions" isn't quite right either... Let me think... Hmm... It's the final word, conclusion... what can we call it?! --kingboyk18:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
ISBNs
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for the compliment. Yes, I have been as careful as I can, and after the first 12,000 edits no-one has complained about the formatting being wrong per se, although one guy thinks it's a waste of time, and one was convinced that they should be a block of characters. Incidentally there are about 2,600 regular expressions making up the hyphenation rule base, although it could be done in less. ISBN's that don't fit the hyphenation rules are labelled as invalid, and I have done a separate run to categorise those which don't match their checksum - many of which editors have already fixed. RichFarmbrough 22:13 28 August2006 (GMT).
Latest comment: 18 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Kingboyk. I've noticed your bot doing some good work with tagging articles belonging to WikiProject Biography. Over at WikiProject Australia, we have a project requiring the tagging of a vast number of articles with the Australia project banner for the puspose of assessment. I and several other local editors have been performing this role manually, but we've still got some way to go. Are you open to sharing the source code of your bot, or perhaps allowing your bot to run over Australia-related articles to help us out with our template tagging? If you remember, we met when you nominated the Beatle Barkers article for deletion. I just wish I could find my original cassette recording so I could give you a listen :) The search continues... -- Longhair12:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! I knew I knew the name from somewhere :) Actually, my bot is "just" AWB in automatic mode. If you're not an approved user of AWB I'd be happy to add you to the approved list and you can give it a try. (Or, if you're an admin just add yourself to the list).
If you have many thousands of edits to do, I'd suggest asking one of the other AWB botmasters if they'd do it for you. Just have a look at recent changes, and click "show bots". You'll soon see who's doing this kind of work :). (I'd be happy to do it, but you'd be at the back of a long queue - I have many many biographies still do - perhaps as many as another 100,000. --kingboyk13:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy and informative reply. I'll give AWB a whirl. I've mostly been a hardcore vanilla Wikipedia admin until now, and haven't given the many available tools a trial run yet, save for the vandal fighting weapons on offer. Old habits die hard :) Time to automate I think. Thanks again. I'll let you know how things work out. -- Longhair13:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
AWB will probably look a bit scary at first, but it's not too difficult. Let me know if you need any help getting started. --kingboyk13:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I think I've used it actually, in a previous life. It looks familiar and my username is already on the approved list. I'm somewhat technically minded, but don't be surprised if I come running back for help if things go awry on a grand scale. :) Thanks. -- Longhair13:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Seems I've hit a hitch already. Sorry for being back so fast :) After adding my new bot account, Longbot, to the approved list, and configuring AWB to run manually on a very small number of articles as a test, I'm receiving the error 'You are not enabled to use this'. Is there a delay before I'm authenticated? -- Longhair13:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Now that I don't know... you seem to be in the list. Is "Longbot" in the AWB users list too? Perhaps it needs to be. Don't forget that if you're doing it automatically you'll have to apply for a "bot licence" too :) There's no delay, no, but it might be worth clearing your IE cache, restarting AWB and trying again? --kingboyk14:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again. I'll give those suggestions a try. I don't plan on running auto until such time as I'm 100% certain AWB is acting as it should and causing no harm. One further question if you don't mind... As I plan to edit talk pages exclusively, is there something I'm missing to enable AWB to edit talk pages only? It seems to be attracted to the mainspace only. -- Longhair14:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi - I saw you comment on the debate over pornography images - I'm glad it's not just me who is not surprised that schools would be wary of sites with such images on it. I'm currently doing more checking but I *think* (and am trying to get it confirmed) that according to the current Department of education guidance that to all purposes, wikipedia IS a pornographic site and therefore should not be allowed in schools. --Charlesknight18:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Steve, if you get a chance, would you take a look at Category:WikiProject Northern Ireland participants for me? Its supposed to list all the participantss who have the User WPNornIrn template on their userpages, but I can't find what's wrong with it. Its probably something silly.
Two users so far (that I'm aware of) that use the template on their pages are myself and User:Keithgreer - though he includes it indirectly from another template page in his user space.
I suspect the problem is this - Special:Statistics. Mediawiki has a "job queue", where updates to the link tables caused by editing templates (including adding to categories) get queued up for processing. The queue is currently very long, not least because the widely used {{WPBiography}} has been edited today (and that was me ;)). Null editing the 3 pages which use your template has put them into the category. (To do a null edit just click edit and save the page). --kingboyk18:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks WikiGuru! ;) Incidentally, the 'pedia has been a bit slower than usual over the past week or two. I added some stuff to my monobook page recently, but it had been slower before that. You reckon that might be down to the Biography work being done at the mo too? --Mal19:48, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Nah, I doubt it. My bot's not going very fast (I don't have a very fast connection). The job queue ought to run when the resources are available. It's more likely the network issues which caused the recent outages, I'd have thought. --kingboyk19:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC) PS Cheque to usual address, please.
Duplicate WPBiography Entries
Latest comment: 18 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
This bot is adding duplicate WPBiography entries. I've seen it on at least two articles I monitor. Please check it out. Morphh20:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about this and in a timely fashion. I'm certain the "a&e-work-group" param is breaking my regular expression parser. I've stopped the bot and will tweak/recompile/test. Fortunately we don't have many articles tagged with that param (which is why I didn't catch the error) so hopefully no great harm done :) Will report back in a few minutes. --kingboyk20:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's it. My regular expression was expecting a parameter to be a letter, number or hyphen. My mistake. I've added ampersand now so it's finding template instances with a&e-work-group= in them. Thanks again for letting me know. --kingboyk20:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
needs=infobox=yes, breaks the regular expression again. I'll think about making the regular expression less strict, although of course that template instance is broken whatever we do about it :) --kingboyk08:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Bethicalyna
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
She can talk to whoever she likes on her talk page. She's not blocked from editing that page. Let's see what encyclopedic edits they have planned and then I'll consider lifting the block (although I might have to consult other admins first). Thanks. --kingboyk08:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Your bot
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
That's covered in the FAQ. If somebody dies (RIP) after I've made my living persons list, they'll get tagged. It's not practical to update the list every few hours because with 115,000+ people in living people, and then 100,000 or so already tagged to filter the list against, it takes a very long time to build the list. This kind of minor annoyance I'm afraid is the price we have to pay for the benefit of having this job done programatically. Sorry about that and thanks for the message. --kingboyk08:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The Queen WikiProject — 2006-31-2006
The Queen WikiProject needs your help.
The Queen WikiProject is setting out guidelines for album and song articles and we need all the help of our members, whether its setting out guidelines, reformatting articles, or just some clean up. If you can help please do so in anyway you can.
Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Imo, 1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?) is the most complete and interesting of the articles you listed. I'm not too great with nitpicking small things in articles, so I'm probably not the best judge of which article is best though. All of them seem very well written to me. One thing I may suggest is using the Template:Listen box for audio samples. I think Wikipedia:Music samples says thats preferable, though I could be mistaken. Cheers and keep up the awesome work! Wickethewok15:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I think we used that template on FTM, but in 1987 we have 3 samples. I guess I'd leave it as is and see if anyone objects :) --kingboyk16:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, btw, since you seem to be pretty good at the whole FA, do you have any suggestions for Sasha (DJ)? I think I fixed all the stuff people were concerned about in the FAC, so I may tidy it up some and nominate it again in the future. Thanks for the help! Wickethewok16:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I was a little surprised it ended as a fail actually, I'd have thought you'd be given some time to clean it up. I don't remember anybody fiercely objecting to it, there were just a few stylistic issues weren't there?
I'd get it as ship-shape as I can and then go to the people who took part in the FAC and ask them if they think it's ready. Don't renominate too soon though, I'd give it at least a few weeks. --kingboyk16:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Plugin
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The initialiseComponent is never called in WPBioSettings. Delete the whole control and make a new one, but use the "project" menu then "new user control", this will set up all the relevant code properly. Martin17:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
What did you have in mind? The only solution I've found for automating in any way is to auto-tag Stub articles as Stub-Class, but I've only done that on an experimental basis so far and somebody has just complained about it. We'll have to wait and see what the answer is (I'm quietly confident it will be OK, as other folks have praised the idea).
Was that what you were thinking or have you got some other scheme? Either way, I won't be able to offer the services of my bot at the moment, but I might nonetheless be able to help. I'm writing an AWB plugin which will add or alter templates with a very simple user interface. Since film is a large project I'd be happy to add support for that template when I can. I'll post on the Project's page when it's ready for download (will be a while yet, I'm a slow coder). --kingboyk07:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
CfD comment
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Steve. I left you a comment on the CfD for the 'alleged & suspected terrorist' cat, in case you want to reassess your vote. I want to say that I will be monitoring the cat to ensure that nobody ever get's categorised there without a valid citation. No worries either way - I just thought it might be a useful category for readers when I created it. --Mal23:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Well it's still got only one article in it. That's a certain deletion unless you get it populated, trust me! --kingboyk07:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Bot question.
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, just looked at the history of Talk:Namitha. There was some discussion on this page and then, a BIO edit by Kingbotk. An anon blanked it after that and Kingbotk did its BIO edit sometime later, without realising that i) it had already worked on the talk page before and that ii) it is working on a blanked/vandalised version. You may want to incorporate a feature where the bot could remember its edits and thus flag of potential vandalism/ blanking by judging if empty talkpages never had the BIO edit or if it has been removed. --Gurubrahma18:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Ooh... what a beautiful young lady :) That's an interesting idea... I'm working on new code at the moment (hence no edits), I'll consider that. Thanks for the suggestion. --kingboyk18:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Need help
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
User Mowens35 (talk·contribs) has been making edits to members of the Pahlavi dynasty in removing their titles. I agree that these people aren't rulers of Iran but they haven't renounced to their title. Would you please help me in trying in to resolve this. Maybe if the user would add a source to what he claims it would help but he doesn't. Why should I do? Lincher19:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Collegiate atmosphere?
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
To Hell with collegiate atmosphere. Being polite to him helps as much as being disrespectful to him, and he isn't even close to even deserve respect for deciding that he owns the Bowser article (oh, yeah, you didn't notice? Maybe you were just wearing your elitist goggles). Maybe when he actually gives me a single reason why he deserves to be a Wikipedian, THEN I'll show him respect. But everytime I see him take it upon himself to declare other Wikipedians' opinions worth shit, I'll think less and less about him. Does he not think that discussion was necessary? Does he not think that people value their opinions being respected? I asked him to respect a consensus, and he said that he doesn't have to, in so many words. Being uncivil, swearing, throwing insults, I'm not being nearly as disrespectful to him as he is to the entire CVG community, assuming that they're a bunch of idiots who want CVG to rule Wikipedia. So before you preach to me and threaten me with a block for being disrespectul, consider how big of an ass JzG has been, how big of an elitist he has been and how disrespectful he has been throughout this whole process. - A Link to the Past(talk)08:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for letting me know. I also thought I hadn´t a hope in hell of getting in, but I was very pleased to be nominated. Not signing my own acceptance? Good grief, what a plonker... andreasegde10:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
This should have been discussed with the group. This changing my javascript code in how it tags articles. If you can revert your changes that would be the best and use WPFilms as the redirect. Shane(talk/contrib)17:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
What Javascript code is it (what/where)? It's a really hopeless name for a high priority template, you know that right? --kingboyk17:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah I see it. Wouldn't it be best to change your code? Shorter names are better. Also, I'm writing an AWB plugin for WikiProject templates and I'm planning to support your template. You'll be welcome to a copy when it's ready. --kingboyk17:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, but the group has not approved the change of the template name nor the new look.. which I hope the look would be changed first before the template name. Shane(talk/contrib)23:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion
Modern standard German eagleThis was not in this UBX
Please put that back. It's an expression of my position in the UBX debate and you have no right to attempt to silence me -- or anyone else who might wish to disagree. The "German Solution" has not triumphed and you have no right to drive it forward by force. Finally, you show an insulting ignorance in your deletion log edit summary. My ethnic background is German and I take personal offense when you see a modern symbol of the contemporary Federal Republic of Germany and label it "using Nazi Germany symbology". Perhaps you are thinking of something else.
Oh I see. I apologise for that part then, I wasn't aware that it's the current German symbol in that form. Nonetheless "sleepless nights", "German solutions" and the image all tend to add up to an uncomfortable message. There's no need to tell me you have German ancestry, as if that gives you any extra authority - it's precisely because I have such a liking for the modern German person that I don't wish to see anything which can even remotely link the "final solution" with the "userbox solution". Modern Germans have nothing to do with those terrible atrocities and nor should userboxes.
Please find a more suitable wording for your userbox and you'll have no problems from me. Whilst I apologise totally and sincerely for not being up to scratch on my German iconography, there's absolutely no way I'm restoring the userbox in that form and that's non negotiable. Please appeal at WP:DRV or better still just create a new one with a wording which is less likely to be misinterpreted. --kingboyk19:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The answer is no. The wording is entirely suitable. You lost all ability to claim the moral high ground when you declared yourself a bigot. All Germans are not Nazis. No Nazi symbol or allusion is contained in the template. Restore it now. All Germans are not fascists; your attempt to force the German Userbox Solution on us is. John Reid02:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Calling someone a bigot isn't going to help. Kingboyk already explained that they didn't realize it was a modern German icon and not a Nazi one. People make mistakes, let it go. If you think it was really wrong, take it to deletion review, but don't go making personal attacks against and admin who seems to have been acting in good faith. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen!05:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
They realized they made a mistake with assuming the image was a nazi one. I frankly don't know if they made a mistake with the rest, because I have yet to see what the text of the message was. They seem to think the text itself was purposefully meant to invoke images of Nazism, whether this is true or not, I cannot say. I see two short excerpts quoted above, and they make me think that may have been the purpose. I could be wrong though, so like I said, if you think it was a bad decision, take it to deletion review because Kingboyk obviously isn't going to reverse their decision. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen!06:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Blocking
Latest comment: 18 years ago15 comments3 people in discussion
I'm not involved in a dispute. I went to that page as an uninvolved admin after seeing it on JzG's page. I warned the user of the consequences of continuing incivility, he ignored it and those consequences were implemented. Please don't come round here bluntly telling me what to do (and assuming I'm so stupid I need to see a diff) without doing your research first. --kingboyk20:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
You are in the dispute over Bowser, which is where the insults arose. Anyhow, the fact of the matter is that you are biased - you are on the side of JzG, and you accused me of acting as if I own the article, when it was JzG who disregarded a previous consensus on the issue completely. - A Link to the Past(talk)20:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
For someone going around blocking people for incivility, your response is incredibly rude ("so stupid [you] need a diff" - or perhaps I was just trying to give you and anyone who happens to be reading the page some context? Geez.) In any case, you know quite well that you went to the discussion with an agenda and then carried it out, but you don't seem to care, so I'll just forget about it. --SB | T00:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, can you seriously claim you're not involved in a dispute with this editor despite the fact that you reverted a move he made, which was in direct support of JzG's position? --SB | T01:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes. I blocked him for incivility. It was a deserved and justified block. I have no prior involvement with or knowledge of the article in question, and all of my actions there were as an admin. You were incredibly terse in your statement to me and by taking the side of the blocked editor in question you obviously don't care much for civility. Don't come to my talk page and bark orders at me, that's not the way admins talk to each other. Ask me to review a decision, suggest perhaps I got it wrong, whatever. Anyway, I've had enough of this so please do just forget it. --kingboyk07:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Prior to me being blocked by you, you supported keeping the video game character where it was. The mere concept that you are not biased is laughable. You protected it from being moved (or at least attempted on two occasions) so that it would remain at that article, which you did based on your personal opinion. You did not factor in the fact that JzG labelled a consensus invalid and moved it back anyway, and based on that fact, I cannot say with a straight face that you were acting as an admin at all in any of your decisions (with the exception of the block, which I suspect you would be less interested in enforcing if I were agreeing with you). Every single action involved in this was in favor of your side - keeping it at the page, for instance. Did you ever stop to consider that he should actually be the one starting up a vote to get it moved to Bowser (Nintendo)? Do we have to do this every other day? No one would ever say that if someone moves one article despite clear opposition that the opposition would have to jump through hoops to revert it, as long as it wasn't a video game character. See, he has to do a vote, he has to TRY to move it the way he wants. We tried and succeeded, it's his turn. The fact that you defend his right not to have to respect a previous consensus shows that you're editing with your opinions by your side. - A Link to the Past(talk)08:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Let's just try and deal with the matter in hand. Is there any consensus for what the page should be called? I propose bringing in another admin to determine if there's any consensus. You can veto the choice or make your own suggestion. My suggestion is User:Kirill Lokshin - he's well respected, has no prior involvement, and is American. What do you say? --kingboyk08:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
The matter at hand is you're abusing your powers to further your opinion in this matter. Despite there being a consensus a while back for Bowser (Nintendo) to be at Bowser, he moved it, I attempted to revert it, and you decided to back him up and attempt to prevent me from making a necessary move. - A Link to the Past(talk)09:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Since you haven't answered my question I'll take it you have no opinion on the matter. I'll ask Kirill to take a look. I've removed the Bowser pages from my watchlist and you can consider me uninvolved from now on, alright? --kingboyk09:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
So you were involved? I guess you must have lied when you said you had no involvement with the dispute. You have never addressed the fact that every single edit made in the Bowser articles has been completely in favor of what you want the articles to be, and you have never explained why I am acting as if I own the article by saying we should respect a consensus, while he is not when he holds his stance on the matter higher than others. - A Link to the Past(talk)09:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Just give it a rest. You considered me involved, now you can consider me uninvolved, that is all. I've asked Kirill Lokshin and ZScout to take a look so why don't we sit back and see what they have to say. --kingboyk09:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
It's not as simple as that. You act as if you did nothing wrong and you're perfectly balanced, and everytime I ask you you refuse to answer. Can you give me a reason to not assume that means you agree that you are completely biased and abusing your sysop privileges to get your way in this matter? - A Link to the Past(talk)09:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
It's not "my way". It's trying to restore order after a faux consensus from Nintendo fans. Do you really think I care about bowsers? You know, I wake up in the morning and think "gosh, I sure hope nobody has moved the beloved page on water tankers". I'm not going to discuss this any more - if you think I've done any wrong, take it to the admins noticeboards. Over and out. --kingboyk09:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, great attitude - a consensus is invalid because of the people voting in them. You might as well say what you're trying to get buy - Nintendo fans are idiots, and none of the voters could ever possibly comprehend that Bowser may be more known as a water tank or gas pumps. It couldn't be that they know of these and still believe that the video game character is more known as Bowser than a water tank or gas pumps, it must be that they have an agenda to have CVG take over Wikipedia. You really need to grow up. You're assuming that every Nintendo fan is an idiot, is always in favor of CVG and aren't good Wikipedians (which you seem to think that, since you called it a faux consensus on the basis of who voted). How you became an admin with such an ignorant, arrogant and stupid attitude is beyond me. - A Link to the Past(talk)20:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
From my sandbox talk
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Something to consider on your usage of the FA star... Some time back User:Raul654, the Featured Article Director here at Wikipedia suggested portals cease using the word Featured on their pages. After some discussion, most portals responded by replacing Featured article with Selected article for showcasing their articles of high quality. Not everyone is going to like your use of the featured article star on your userpage as per the above editors tweaking of your userpage. I can't seem to find the old discussion on this topic but I thought I'd let you know what's happened previously in case a similar topic arises again. -- Longhair02:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot output problem
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Yes Mal, but Oleg's on holiday :P Only he can fix it. You'll have to grin and bear it til he gets back mate, sorry. --kingboyk19:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Not a problem. I was just wanting to make sure people were aware of the problem (or determine where the problem is exactly). Cheers. --Mal02:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Ownership/scope
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Isn't the Rolling Stone 500 category that better listed on CFD? I dropped a response to you on the copyvio listing, but since you probably wouldn't be checking that again, I figured I'd repeat my comment here. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the Featured Article badge on The Beatles was revoked. The article was immediately nominated for Good Article status, which it received later that same day. Project member Kingboyk said of the nomination, "I'm quite happy about it really, as I feel that GA is about where we're at and gives some incentive to work on the article."
We have a new category for Beatles articles needing attention. If you're looking for something to work on, the articles in this category and the subcategories need some TLC. To put an article in this category, tag its talk page with {{WPBeatles|attention=yes}}.
Kingboyk has given {{WPBeatles}} another major overhaul, and has assessed all of the Beatles articles. He would be grateful if other editors would leave comments on the state of articles, needed improvements and so on, by clicking the Comments link in the template. Also, feel free to revise the gradings—the assessments were done quickly, and article quality can change.
No articles have been adopted this past month. Adopt one now!
A month of slow progress and some amazing efforts. Still need help getting comments shifted. Don't forget to log your accomplishments!
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 006 – October 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
Project: Add {{WPBeatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members, and coordinate tasks. Enter articles classed as stubs into this list (under To Expand) and also list articles needing cleaning and other work here.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.
Thanks!
Latest comment: 18 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for letting me know, my face is slightly red, but no harm, no foul. From now on, i'll use the guitarist tag, thank you for the notification. Mutebutton15:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
lol, well, I started in April, but I didn't do anything for a long time after that, so I guess i'm still new. Sure, delete away. How do you delete something, btw? Mutebutton15:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Ah, ok, that make sense. I was tooling around the other day and I saw the rfa adming thing there. Is there a way you could help me become one of those? It sounds very useful. Mutebutton15:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer but it wasn't stuff I was able to delegate - fixing up a template, tweaking an article for Featured Article submission, and some programming. Tell me what kind of things you want to do on wiki though and I'm sure I can send you in the right direction :) --kingboyk20:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Steve Irwin
Latest comment: 18 years ago10 comments2 people in discussion
I'm an Aussie, and I took the news of Irwins death as quite a shock. I'm removing tributes also. As a administrator yourself, please help set an example. There's plenty of other places online to grieve and it's our job to keep talk pages readable for the purpose they exist. That said, it's very sad news, and I sense your loss. We're all feeling it. -- Longhair20:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, whatever, I'm clearly in the minority (minority of one?) so I shall heed your advice. It was a shock, wasn't it, but what really shocked me was that he died in a diving accident. Not milking snakes of venom, wrestling crocodiles or handling deadly spiders, but doing something that thousands of tourists every year do - me included and I'm just your average couch potato :) --kingboyk20:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Aye, true enough. Well since you're here I may as well ask you about the WikiProject :) Did you get sorted out with AWB? How's the tagging and assessing going? --kingboyk20:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm writing a plugin for AWB to make templating a bit easier. How many articles do you have in scope? (give or take a few thousand :)). If we're talking 10,000 or so and if you think it would be helpful I could add support for your template. --kingboyk20:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I saw your work on a plugin and was waiting eagerly. To be honest, I don't know. Australia content is so vast and growing fast every day, it's near impossible to guage an accurate figure of a total. We've tagged about 5,000 and it feels like we're nowhere near the bottom yet. -- Longhair20:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, well, download it when I publish a version and see if it's any use. If it is, I'll add your template. I was hoping to get a version tested and released today but got sidetracked by FAC work and WPBio template rewriting :( It's not terribly complicated at the moment, just some regular expressions and a nice user interface but I think it will speed the job up, and of course over time I can add more features. Anyway, mate, thanks for cheering me up a bit, it's been a tad depressing round here lately. Have a tinnie for me! See ya. --kingboyk20:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Will do. It's only 6.45am here. I've got the entire day's news to sit through yet. That tinnie sounds like it's coming my way at some stage, though I'm usually a scotch man myself. One can't hurt :) -- Longhair20:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
You're right...
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
What those Wikipedia fascists don't understand is that while Wikipedia is a source of information meant to be accessible and non-elitist, having a rigid view of Wikipedia rules and defending them out of pure cliquish fascism does this project no good.--Folksong20:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Copyvio on CFD/W
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I've removed your listing on CFD/W "alleged copyvio". Please do not list categories to be deleted until either a new CFD discussion has resulted in a delete result, or your claim of copyvio has been established. As of now neither of those two have happened. --Kbdank7102:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
CSD G4 and 3 editors claiming copyvio isn't enough then? Why are you so keen to keep these, they seem to me hardly vital categories. Am I missing something? --kingboyk07:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I created the page a while a go for a friend who wanted my revert javascript from my monobook. Later i decided to use it for a new project Betacommand19:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Apparently, you can hide bot edits in your watchlist, but you have to click the "hide" button every time you visit your watchlist. Ral315 (talk) 16:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Break - my a***
Latest comment: 18 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
If your on a break, DONT NOMINATE MY PROJECT FOR DELETION. My project was live first if you didn't know. During the time when my project launched, Stefans was userspace, it was not official. I request you remove the template AND NOW. Lenny18:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from using coarse language, this can get you banned. The process will go on, if you like it or not, a request for deletion cannot be stopped until it reaches the end of the process. Lincher19:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Actually if you took time to read it properly, you'll see it wasn't me who nominated it - I only added a clarification. That said, it doesn't matter who the nominator was. Wikipedia works on consensus, and if the community thinks your project is a bad idea, it will go. If they think it's a good idea, it will stay
Perhaps what you want is your own site - you can get web hosting for a few dollars a month and download Mediawiki for free. You could be your own Jimbo Wales! But here, nope, you can't (unless you're Jimbo of course). You have to accept consensus and learn to work with other people. C'est la vie my friend. --kingboyk19:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
On break or not?
Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Please stop playing hide-and-seek. I strongly object to your attempt to sweep this issue under the rug. You've admitted your mistake and you have the power to undo the wrong. Step up like a man, fix the problem, and let us all move forward. Thank you.John Reid11:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm on break because I'm working on software which interfaces with Wikipedia. If I get messages while I'm testing something I get that horrible yellow banner!
I've told you I'm not going to restore the userbox. Take it to DRV if you don't agree. That's my last word on the subject.
There's no reason why the image should stay deleted though because that was indeed a mistake for which I have apologised. That has been restored and can be found at . --kingboyk11:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
To explain
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've noticed a fair few biography articles that have seemingly been forgotten about entirely by both wikipedians and the project in regards to there importance recently and it's become suprisingly regular. The three that stood out after David Attenborough were Malcolm X, Oscar Wilde and Stanley Kubrick. That's why I've moved the discussion to core because as of now two of those, X and Attenborough, have rankings of high which i've designated but realised that both are candidates for top. I've left Wilde and Kubrick for now to see how this plays out. If I've something feel free to inform me, I am not well versed in the new ranking system. –– Lid(Talk)16:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
.jpg)
