User talk:Odie5533/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

About the vandalism on Echinocactus polycephalus

Hi there. When edits are obvious vandalism, for example this one, it would be more appropriate to remove the vandalism and to not add the fact tag. And on a related note, good job with the reversions! Antivenin 08:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

This one's for you

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For repeatedly reverting vandalism on my user page and tireless, outstanding work with Huggle. Antivenin 09:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Me and obama.png

Just letting you know, it is not appropriate to use I10 on images. Thanks, — neuro^(talk) 21:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

My apologies

My apologies for the entirely inappropriate vandalism warning on your userpage, sorry. Cool3 (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my talk page. This guy is a real problem. He's taken to personal attacks and threats here and on French wikipedia, where he is suspended. Vincent (talk) 05:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Mackellar Girls Campus

An ip is again and agian reverting edits on this page.Shouldn't request for page protection.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Page-protection is generally only granted for extremely high amounts of vandalism. A single ip reverting edits results in a temporary block (usually). See WP:PP for details on page-protection and WP:AIV for reporting users for repeated vandalism --Odie5533 (talk) 05:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I know this,I was talking about semi-protection,because this article has been constanlty being edited by more than one ip.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

It's only been vandalized twice in the past 3 months. That's not nearly enough for semi-protection (usually). Even if it is more editors, semi-protection is more for pages which are currently receiving vandalism. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

So I should only report the ip ?User:Yousaf465 (talk)

No. The user needs to be warned on their talk page before anything will be done in cases of minor vandalism. Since it was such a minor act, I did not even issue a warning. Generally speaking, users are not blocked for doing really small changes like adding exclamations marks. WP:UTM has a list of warning you can add to users' talk pages. Just be sure to always assume good faith. --Odie5533 (talk) 06:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Your page seems to have been vandalised.While writing the previous msg. I saw something like "I am ass" all over the place please check.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

RC Patrol is good fun eh? --Odie5533 (talk) 06:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Who say it's fun,it is a headace,atleast you don't have to fight an edit war.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

I find it interesting, reading all the changes to a gigantic encyclopedia. Plus I get to help it at the same time. And plenty of the edits are good laughs. --Odie5533 (talk) 06:08, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

		Mmm - Milk!
		Hard work

Wikipedia is intersting,you see all range of people,all view points.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Huggle warning?

I got a warning on my talk page regarding an edit of bloods. I am assuming it was issued by mistake since Huggle interface could be tricky sometimes.∏∪βiατεch 05:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Quaploid

I am currently studying a degree in medical genetics at the University of Leicester and have been researching and questioning the chromosome number in meiosis. Using the term quaploid refers to x4 that of haploid cells, as this is what a replicated diploid is after interphase. The term is totally logically and even helps to understanding such process. It is acceptable and should be used, like that of diploid and haploid. The term diploid would not have been seen in scientific journals when first applied but now widely accepted, quaploid will be too.Fannysyouraunt2 (talk) 10:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Super-recursive algorithm

I'd really like to see that article be more readable, too. The long history of that article is that it was started by an editor with a quite fringe POV on the topic, and has been hard to improve because of that.

However, there is a general principle not to change Harvard-style citations to footnotes, or vice-versa, one the style has been established. I changed them back.

I am going to see if I can improve the article some right now. If you could leave a short list of the parts you find worst on the talk page, that would be extremely helpful. — Carl (CBM · talk) 23:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The article doesn't really use any specific style. Or, if it is meant to be Harvard it is not used throughout. I have not come across the keep it harvard style principle in my reading of the MoS, nor have I seen a single featured article with inline parenthetical citations. I only broke the style in attempt to better the article. Anyways, good luck and thanks for letting me know that you did revert the change. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:47, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

If you have a minute to look at the article, now that I edited it this afternoon, could you tell me if the lede and first section seem somewhat readable? — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The lead has a lot of jargon just thrown in towards the end of the first paragraph. I know a bit about computer algorithms, but most of the article still goes over my head. Also, the entire article reads as an essay on Burgin's views on super-recursive algorithms as opposed to an article on the algorithms themselves. --Odie5533 (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I agree with your last sentence; the difficulty is that although Burgin managed to get a book published about these, nobody else uses the term at all, and so there isn't much difference between "super recursive algorithms" and "Burgin's views on super recursive algorithms". If there were a body of established literature that used the term, it would be much easier to write the article. Because, for example, it would be more clear exactly what the things are. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Mistake

Thanks a lot for cleaning up the Australian Maths and Science School's wikipedia page. There has been repeated vandalism on the school's page, and this has been repeatedly fixed.

However, because of repeated vandalism and reverting, the school's principal has incorrectly been changed to 'Associate Professor Jim Davies' (Jim Davies is the name of the year 12 captain) instead of Rick Astley.

I do not have the knowledge or experience to fix this myself, and if you would take the time to correct your mistake, that would be much appreciated.

Cheers,

Antony Kjiavaris Year 10 co-ordinator —Preceding unsigned comment added by Offbeatdnb (talk • contribs) 03:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

This is false. there is no mistake. There is also no staff member by the name 'Antony Kjiavaris' at this school --Osiris2014 03:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

((future product)) small version

Hi Odie5533. I left a message for you at Template talk:Future product#Small version.

And I have since updated the second example (the "Complex example") at Template:Ambox#Usage, since I realised this "small=left" stuff probably is pretty confusing. You might want to take a look at that example.

Oh, and thanks for liking the small style! I am very happy that people suggested it and got a consensus for it.

--David Göthberg (talk) 01:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Halo 3 Versions

Readability, mostly. Tables like that take up a lot of room with code and can be difficult to sort through. To prevent casual editors from malforming the table accidentally or intentionally, I shunted it off to a separate page. (I did a similar thing for set costs in Star Trek: The Motion Picture#Design.) Cheers, Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Images

If you read this, you'll learn more. Basically, the page is a FL, so all images need to have full information. For example, this image says it is more than 70 years old but doesn't have a publication date and says the source is another wikipedia project. this one says it's PD because the author has been dead 70 years, but it doesn't name the author. And so on and so on. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Scilab

Hello,

I don't understand why you did this modification: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scilab&diff=281051911&oldid=280407476 Thx S —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylvestre (talk • contribs) 11:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I tagged it as {{advert}} because of certain phrases I found when reading it:

• "but is available for download at no cost"
• "widely used in several industry and research projects" (WP:PEACOCK)
• the section spends too much time comparing it to MatLab

There are also numerous copyediting problems, bad flow, and wordy, which adds to the advertising effect by presenting quick facts to peak readers' interest in the product. If you want more specifics on the flow, wordiness, and copyediting, I'd be more than happy to oblige. --Odie5533 (talk) 11:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello Odie5533,

Yes, please provide more details and I will do my best to fix them. I agree that it is a bit chatty and informal, but it didn't quite read as an advertisement; at least to me. User A1 (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Please correct me if I am wrong on any points, but here is my view on the current revision after you've cleaned it up User A1, inlcuding its advertising aspects and any other things I find generally wrong with it (perhaps another tag is in order along with the advertisement tag):

• First sentence should have some wikilinks

• The second sentence appears factually incorrect, abstraction does not directly lead to lesser lines of code.

• Entire first paragraph focuses on abstraction, which does not seem specific to Scilab but a more general explanation of the paradigm, which probably belongs on the abstraction page and a brief comment on this article.

• I still think the second paragraph is too close to Matlab.

• In the second paragraph, it seems to imply that open source means it is available at no cost. This generalization is best avoided.

• The second paragraph really wanders, moving from the cost of the program to its advanced capabilities in only a sentence or so. Also not enough wikilinks.

• Third paragraph again wanders, and compares it directly to Matlab and makes use of peacock wording.

So to reiterate the advertising points:

1. Compared as a free version of MATLAB

1. Use of peacock words

--Odie5533 (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll do my best to address these --- in about 8 hrs time. User A1 (talk)

• First sentence should have some wikilinks

Other than "programming language" what can one link in "Scilab is a high level, numerically oriented programming language."? (I did link programming language, and numerical analysis is linked above)

• The second sentence appears factually incorrect, abstraction does not directly lead to lesser lines of code.

I tried to reduce this emphasis. In this case it does for many problems. In the latter case it does not

• Entire first paragraph focuses on abstraction, which does not seem specific to Scilab but a more general explanation of the paradigm, which probably belongs on the abstraction page and a brief comment on this article.

The abstraction here is that one is trying to use a language tailored to solving numerical problems. Linear algebra is a marvellous tool for representing all sorts of problems, hence scilab is a good tool in which to do this.

• I still think the second paragraph is too close to Matlab.

I have tried to reduce this emphasis, whilst still stating that a matlab-> scilab converter exists. This is important to anyone who already has a large matlab program they wish to run under scilab (I have used this myself).

• In the second paragraph, it seems to imply that open source means it is available at no cost. This generalization is best avoided.

I removed the word "hence", such that the two are now separate

• The second paragraph really wanders, moving from the cost of the program to its advanced capabilities in only a sentence or so. Also not enough wikilinks.

Shortened, and a few links inserted

• Third paragraph again wanders, and compares it directly to Matlab and makes use of peacock wording.

No more third paragraph

2. Use of peacock words

Sorry, I am not clear on this : Which words are peacock in this case? Are they are gone now?

If you are content with the changes, please could you either remove the tag, make some modifications, or reply with some suggestions. User A1 (talk) 10:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Image Deletion Request

Could you remove File:JohnLAndersonSignature.png? While I understand that signatures are not protected by copyright, the signatory is concerned about unauthorized use of his signature, and would appreciate its removal. It's being removed from the source page as well.

And thanks for all your work on the IIT Wikipedia pages. Iithhs (talk) 16:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I am not able to delete files, only admins can do that. If you feel the image should be deleted, please first review the Commons's deletion policy (note that the image was uploaded not to Wikipedia, but to the Wikimedia Commons). If you still feel the file should be deleted, go here and click the "Nominate for deletion" at the bottom on the left side. Enter in the reason for the deletion, and the community will then decide whether or not the image should be deleted. I have restored the image to the article. Concerns with identity theft should be discussed with lawyers, not other Wikipedians. --Odie5533 (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing me up to speed on the deletion procedure. I've nominated the image for deletion and we'll see what happens. I'm a bit confused about your last comment though, as I'm not trying to discuss identity theft with Wikipedians, I'm working to prevent it for the signatory. I understand the motive for uploading such an image to the Commons, and I don't mean to impugn yours. I simply wanted to give a reason for the request. Iithhs (talk) 16:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Aspartame controversy

Can you come over to Talk:Aspartame controversy and be specific about what you feel is missing from the Ramazzini studies section? Is it an issue of WP:WEIGHT? Certainly, the Soffritti studies have had more detractors than they have had supporters. I know there is often a lot of drama there, but I'm pretty sure we've been making progres. Thanks. --SV Resolution(Talk) 18:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Snipmanager

I want to know if you could create nested menu's in snipmanager. I also would like to know what program if any(for my own interest) you used to code it. Thank you.Smallman12q (talk) 02:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

It is not currently possible to create nested menus though I may be able to add the ability in the future. I used Notepad++ to code the program and Greasemonkey to be able to see the changes instantly without having to change the Wikipedia version while I code. Glad to see someone interested in my program, thanks. --Odie5533 (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to devolp a simple set of ribbon menus together with nested menus to make the usage of templates a lot easier. I've found that as I go through wikipedia, a lot of users are finding there are too many templates to use and there is no automated way of plugging in info. Ideally, I'd like to be add templates automatically rather than manually.Smallman12q (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

That's likely impossible for many templates. And there's also too many to include all of them. Automation would not be easy for nested templates, or templates with features that aren't supposed to be used. Perhaps a set of scripts to automate *some* template addition. But this would not include the tool tip documentation SnipManager uses, as each template has its own method of displaying docs. --Odie5533 (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking to use a parser to automate or semi-automate the addition of templates by reading off their documentation (perhaps a standard could be written for the documentation), and category, but thats for later. For now, I would really appreciate if you could make a nested menu. (I used to code in a number of languages, but all I remember now is the logic=( ). I'm not sure if you're aware, but a nested menu would be handy in resolving several scripting requests such as Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Requests#Templates_in_edit_toolbar. Thanks again for responding. Cheers!Smallman12q (talk) 01:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

As it is a very old request, I don't see a reason to fill it other than to be able to tick off one of the requests. What exactly are you aiming at creating? And with no programming knowledge, how do you plan on creating it? Or are you requesting something? And if so, please specify exactly what that is and not just a portion of it, as you've mentioned two things: nested menus and ribbon menus (two nearly polar opposites for toolbar design). --Odie5533 (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Its not that I have no programming knowledge, its that I haven't programmed in a few years and don't quite recall everything. I would like to have a ribbon(tab) menu together with horizontal nested menus. The nested menu's would be within the tab menu. Im aiming to create a toolbar that has all of the citation/reference templates, and a lot more of other templates(such as disambig, various cleanup templates, etc). I've found that there is no addon or script that covers the majority of the templates(each script generally only cover a few templates), and what I would like is to create one in which the most templates can be easily accessed. I would like to start with having nested menus so I'll have more room to add in the templates. The tab menu will come later when I start adding a greater variety of templates and want to subcategorize them. Again, I would like to thank you for your patience and quick response. Cheers! Smallman12q (talk) 12:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch!!! Thats exactly what I had in mind (in the future, you could add multi-level drop menus from options with the ribbon menu such as web, but for now...thats awesome=D). I'll work on filling up the ribbon menu. =P.Smallman12q (talk) 23:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		I hereby award Odie5533 with The da Vinci Barnstar for outfitting his Snippet Manager user script with a ribbon GUI and for the script in general which has made adding templates 10x easier. Thanks!!!Smallman12q (talk) 23:56, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar! Please share any additions you make to the ribbon, as I'd be happy to update them on my script page. Changes work by designing the menu in window.smRibbon and the ItemCodes map to values in window.smConfig['smForms']. window.smClickOption has a list of available functions for use in the smForms, or just use the other forms I've coded as examples. --Odie5533 (talk) 22:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

You deserve the barnstar! The script is fairly easy to follow so I won't have much of a problem adding templates in. I do still have a few requests and suggestions which can be seen at User:Smallman12q/Scripts/Snippet_Manager. Mainly 3 things...

1. That there should be a spot for "reference name"
2. That there should be a short general description of the template and a link to the template after the description.
3. That there be an automatic template documentation to parameter. This can be done with most properly documented templates in which the paremeter is preceded by * and is in bold and is followed by the paremeter description.

I also would like to suggest that you look at a javascript compressor as more templates and code will be added...you could decrease the size by more than 25%. compression comparison, CSS compressor, dynamic tools, compressor, white space compactor,yahoo,more Again, I would like to thank you for your continued support and response. Cheers!!Smallman12q (talk) 22:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Since the script can be installed via GreaseMonkey compression will act only as a means of obfuscation since the bandwidth saved is only a one-time savings. I hesitate to add the reference name since it would require a bit of rewriting and would sacrifice my really simple smAddTemplate function. The current setup is for the forms to map only to templates and nothing else. I may change this in the future, to allow for other forms to be created. I have added an option for displaying a description, see the Cite web button on the latest version. I also added a link to the template from the name at the top of the form. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. And for the compression, you're right. But as I hope to load it up with templates, it may grow to a point where compression becomes viable. As a small addition for greasemonkey, I generally use the secure wikimedia server so could you add // @include https://secure.wikimedia.org/* ? Thanks!Smallman12q (talk) 00:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Erm...you added secure.wikipedia not wikimedia=P(the secure site it provided by wikimedia). Could you copy paste // @include https://secure.wikimedia.org/* . Thanks!Smallman12q (talk) 01:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

• Also, I've come up with a fairly simple way to put in reference names...

   //{'title':'Reference name:', 'code':'ref', 'help':'Add a reference name.'}
	var insertText;
	var testforref = form[0]['prepend']
	if(testforref.search("<ref>") != -1)//it is a ref
	{
		if(inputs[1].value.length > 0)//first one should always be ref name //split
			
			insertText = "<ref name = " + inputs[1].value + ">" + testforref.slice(5,-1);//tale out <ref>
		else
			insertText = "<ref>" + form[0]['prepend'];
	}
	else//not a ref
	{
		insertText = form[0]['prepend'];
	}
	var i = 1;
	for (i in inputs) {
		var inp = inputs[i];
		if (inp.value && inp.value.length > 0) {
			insertText += '|' + inp.className + '=' + inp.value;
		}
	}
	insertText += form[0]['append'];
	insertTags(insertText, '', '');
}

I'm not sure if the code will run, but the idea to reserve the 1 row in the array for reference name if its a reference. Let me know if it can implemented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smallman12q (talk • contribs) 01:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I added support for it by offering 'code':'%ref' e.g. {'title':'Reference name:', 'code':'%ref', 'help':'Add a reference name.'}. Also, it doesn't matter if you put it as the first field or not. --Odie5533 (talk) 03:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Documentation to Parameters

In order to make adding templates easier, the parameter creation should be automated as much as possible. I have noticed that most of the documentation for templates follows an order which can be seen as follows which comes from Template:Cite_video_game.

 		<a name="Required_parameters" id="Required_parameters"></a>
 
<h4><span class="mw-headline">Required parameters</span></h4>
<ul>
<li><b>title</b>: Title of the game.</li>
<li><b>developer</b>: Developer of the game.</li>
</ul>
<a name="Optional_parameters" id="Optional_parameters"></a>
<h4><span class="mw-headline">Optional parameters</span></h4>
<ul>
<li><b>date</b>: Full date of publication of the specified version, in <a href="/wikipedia/en/wiki/ISO_8601" title="ISO 8601">ISO 8601</a> YYYY-MM-DD format, eg. <i>2006-02-17</i>. Must not be wikilinked.</li>
 
<li><b>publisher</b>: Publisher, if applicable to translation/edition</li>
<li><b>language</b>: language of publication</li>
<li><b>isolang</b>: If <i><code>language</code></i> is different than "English", add the <a href="/wikipedia/en/wiki/ISO_639" title="ISO 639">ISO 639</a> code for the language to automatically add a <a href="/wikipedia/en/wiki/Category:Language_icons" title="Category:Language icons">language icon</a> in front of the ref</li>
 
<li><b>version</b>: version, if applicable</li>
<li><b>platform</b>: platform, if applicable to the reference. (If citing something that is the same across all versions, this is unnecessary)</li>
<li><b>quote</b>: the quote that is used as the reference</li>
</ul>

I have managed to somewhat automate the "prepend" line with my own script(it doesn't work in greasemonkey), but I'm not very good at coding in javascript anymore. Each option is in bold and has its own line. There is a very logical pattern, but I don't quite have the skill to code it at the moment. (From what I see, it should be a very short script, I just don't know the functions and objects to use.) I hope I'm not becoming a nuisance, but I believe that providing a better method of filling in and using templates would be a major boon to wikipedians. Thank you.Smallman12q (talk) 01:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

As I said before, I don't think automating it is all that useful since you only need to define them once. That being said, I would recommend parsing the source instead of the html, since then you could just search for the regex /{{{([^}\|]+)[^}]*}}}/ and find the parameters. --Odie5533 (talk) 02:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

While I do agree that there is no need to define the templates more than once, there a number of templates(infoboxes, templates, navigation templates, etc.). Say it takes 2 minutes a template to define, for 30 infoboxes, thats an hour of copypasting. I figured it shouldn't take more than a half hour to write the script and hence it would save quite a bit of needless drudgery for hundreds of templates.Smallman12q (talk) 23:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Odie5533/doctoparameter.py. Enjoy. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

A fellow python coder=D. You should label that its for 2.6 not the newer 3.0 version.

[Python source removed] I've made it into a loop...and added a template link. It currently catches the code/parameters, but not the help. It's a start. Thanks again!!!Smallman12q (talk) 00:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

On a side note, the python source code template doesn't seem to work above=(.Smallman12q (talk) 00:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

All you did was add while True and break a lot of the code. Also, please do not embed so much code in my talk page, it's becoming unwieldy. Perhaps User:Smallman12q/doctoparameter_mod.py? --Odie5533 (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. Have you considered archiving your talk page? I plan to make a lot of template to be added to the snippet manager. Where would you like me to post them? Smallman12q (talk) 01:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiTool

Could you add Infobox Person? Thanks, The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 23:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I've added it to the infobox tab. Glad to see someone using my script. --Odie5533 (talk) 00:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I would also suggest Website and Book, and other common infoboxes. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 22:49, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I added both. Let me know of any other templates/infoboxes you would like. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you adapt the code for the Simple English Wikipedia? At least the Citations function. Thanks, The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 20:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I added support for *.wikipedia.org and fixed the preview function to work on other wikis. Be sure to load it as a Greasemonkey script to enable the support. Could you explain what else would need to be done to fulfill your request? --Odie5533 (talk) 22:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

On the seWP, many articles lack sources. So, it is nessecary to have a good citation maker. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 21:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK Nomination: Class of Heroes

Hello! Your submission of Class of Heroes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --TitanOne (talk) 05:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Class of Heroes

On June 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Class of Heroes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 02:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for PHM Pegasus

On June 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article PHM Pegasus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 02:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Edited Entry

I received the following message from you:

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Omar Bravo. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Odie5533 (talk) 19:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know... I never made such an edit. In fact, I've never been to that page before receiving the above message

MistWing SilverTail —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.102.20 (talk) 03:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Call for cleaning

Hi,

I think frameworks and especially PHP frameworks proliferation is becoming unacceptable as people is using Wikipedia to spam their products. This - List of web application frameworks - is a good start to find this kind of articles, however the amount of articles to check is huge, could you help me? Is there a place where I can ask help for this?

Thank you.

-- Ekerazha (talk) 08:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

There are places to ask, like WP:SOFTWARE, but there really isn't that many that need to be deleted. I'm going through some and prod/nominating them for deletion. If you nominate any for deletion I'd be glad to weigh in on the discussion. --Odie5533 (talk) 08:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I've added a task to the "To Do List". Ekerazha (talk) 09:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for revert on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy tagging of 4 classification of color

Hi. I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on 4 classification of color because the criteria you used, A3, is solely for articles which contain "no content whatsoever, or [consist] only of external links, category tags, a "see also" section, a rephrasing of the title, an attempt to correspond with the person or group named by its title, chat-like comments and/or images." Since the article contained material which was none of those A3 doesn't apply.

I agree with you that deletion is desirable though, so I've added a WP:PROD.

Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 08:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for fixing vandalism to my userpage. Grim²³★ 19:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Being bold

True, being bold can get you mixed results. For example, Dave the Barbarian (character) was solely in-universe, and I redirected without opposition. But Red (song) had required AfD. In the end though, those that work save a lot of time and editor resources. And if another editor really disagrees with my decision, then in the collaborative nature, an AfD is a good thing, makes the decision more concrete. So, I've never had a bad experience with it. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD result

Oh well, I guess WP:ILIKEIT sometimes wins over writing an encyclopedia with real information; debate reminded me of WP:Pokémon test. I have found a lot of South Park, King of the Hill, etc. articles with no real-world information, but I am discouraged to try to fix that, because there seem to be a lot of people who think every aspect of their favorite show is notable. Sigh..... Cheers! Scapler (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

The IP

Technically, it wasn't my first. I just forgot I didn't log in. (Reffering to the Lancelot and Guinevere page argument... lol) Goku1st (talk • contribs) 20:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Whale Whores

The quote from the cartoon character Larry King calling Watson and 'incompetent media whore' is why the episode was called Whale Whores. I'm restoring a shorter quote to the plot. Alatari (talk) 07:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Please stop removing sourced information. Alatari (talk) 03:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 23:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

June Martino

You argued persuasively to keep this article; could you take a whack at putting it into proper form? --Orange Mike | Talk 14:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Merged-from deprecation

Hi Odie, I noticed that you recently marked the template {{merged-from}} as deprecated, and I just wanted to ask when/why that decision was made. Since I've used this one before I probably need to know why {{Copied}} is better. Also, in case you need to update it, Help:Merging and moving pages still lists it as an option. Thanks,

-- Joren (talk) 07:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I saw it used more often, and on the merge help articles I was reading it was listed as preferred. {{copied}} is one template for both sides, and having millions of templates gives me a headache (I actually wrote tools to keep track of em for me). If you think it should not be listed as deprecated, feel free to remove that from the docs. --Odie5533 (talk) 08:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Futurama

The season 7 debate has been closed so I can't answer there, but 'Benderama' is listed as an unscheduled episode for season 6 on the season 6 page. Look harder. Omega cyber turnip (talk) 00:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 04:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:GNG applies with more specific guidelines are not available

For what it is worth, I think you are misapplying policy when you cite WP:GNG to justify deletion when more specific guidelines support inclusion. For a music band, for example, deletion debates are readily settled by referencing WP:BAND instead of WP:GNG, with the most straightforward criterion for inclusion being "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." It is not even two-thirds of the way through this month, and http://stats.grok.se/ says It's a Black President, Huey Freeman has already received more than 7000 hits. So why delete, when the specific inclusion policy that applies is Wikipedia:Notability_(serial_works) and it states that "An episode of a television series is likely to be notable if it has achieved one of the following conditions:" and one of those conditions is "The episode has been critically reviewed from a reliable secondary source" (my emphasis). That condition had been unequivocally satisfied. I do not understand your priorities here when there are so many other TV episode articles on Wiki that do not satisfy the clear specific inclusion condition and are significantly lower traffic.Bdell555 (talk) 21:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

My belief is that more specific guidelines, the WP:GNG included (from WP:NOT), exist to clarify and interpret the underlying policies. In the case you are suggesting, the specific guidelines clarify the WP:GNG. I do use more specific guidelines whenever possible, and always for articles far outside of my realm of knowledge. For TV episodes, however, no specific guideline exists with any form of consensus. The one you have linked to regarding serials has a disclaimer on the top of it noting that it is a failed proposal. And had it succeeded, I still believe that by using the WP:GNG the TV article should be deleted. Many articles which are deleted receive significant traffic, but this perhaps does more harm than good. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and including unsourced and unverifiable information on articles with disputed notability I believe hurts the encyclopedia. Regarding other articles with less traffic and even less notability, I recommend they be nominated for deletion; I would be glad to participate in their deletion discussions. --Odie5533 (talk) 21:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, although I am of the view that the material for highest priority for deletion should be dubious material and/or, to quote WP:RS, material "likely to be challenged" (which is not necessarily the same things as "unsourced") and accurate, informative material doesn't "hurt" anyone. Deleting articles that have dozens of edits in their history and high hit counts creates inconvenience and I don't see the rationale when there nothing substantively problematic with the article aside from some people thinking that it would make the encyclopedia too big. I didn't notice the policy was described as "failed". I suspect, however, that just as putting up a lot of music band articles for AfD was an impetus for specific guidelines on band notability, putting up a lot of TV episode articles up for deletion will mean a specific guideline proposal will be back. In particular, I don't agree that an article that is notable by specific guidelines should be deleted by appeal to general guidelines, since specific guidelines are developed to address particular contexts and that context is missind when general guidelines are applied.Bdell555 (talk) 22:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps instead of looking at TV episode removals as deletions, see them as a redirection to a more sourced and verifiable article on Wikipedia which then provides external links for readers to further investigate the subject (e.g. List of The Boondocks episodes and its External links section). Remember, notability does not limit the content of an article. I think Wikipedia is too big in the department of non-notable subjects; in the Featured Article department, however, Wikipedia can never be too big. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Well said. I appreciated this discussion, thank you.Bdell555 (talk) 00:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Michael McCollum AfD

Thanks for the notice. I appreciate the heads up. On one hand I disagree (partly because I created it, and partly because I'm an inclusionist). On the other hand, in the 4 years since this was created, we've probably advanced further on defining what should, and shouldn't, be here. I'll have to research this. Perhaps Clouds of Saturn should be merged to McCollum ... but what should McCollum be merged to ... I hate to loose content completely. Nfitz (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm finally getting a chance to look at this. Doesn't he satisty WP:AUTHOR? He seems to meet criteria 3. The person has created a collective body of work, that has been the subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.. His work in the late 1990s and 2000s doesn't do much, but his work in the 1980s and early of 1990s was widely reviewed in various publications at the time. As for "The Clouds of Saturn" surely it should simply be merged into Michael McCollum. Nfitz (talk) 05:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Which independent periodical articles or reviews are you referring to? Also, I'd recommend discussing this on the AfD discussion so that others may join in. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I seem to recall reviews in various publications at the time. Analog for example. Nothing that's available electronically. Part of the problem with discussing authors who haven't been active since the pre-Internet age (I agree his recent self-publishing stuff isn't notable) is that many of the references to them aren't searchable. The AfD is flagged with a "Please do no modify" note, so discussion there is not possible; and I don't think it's worth opening a DRV just to discuss. Nfitz (talk) 16:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I found this site [1] which has a downloadable database of reviews from Analog. There should be reviews for him, but I don't have these magazines. If you or someone else has access, they might prove his notability:

• Life Probe (Dec. 1983) page 160 volume 103 #13
• Procyon's Promise (Feb. 1986) page 177 volume 106 #2
• Antares Dawn (July 1987) page 179 volume 107 #7

--Odie5533 (talk) 17:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

• Ah, that's interesting. Looks like there's a mostly complete set of them in storage in the library downtown. My office is moving down there in a few months ... if nothing else comes to light, one day I'll pop in and look into it. Nfitz (talk) 17:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Help talk:Merging#Deprecating merged-from and merged-to

Hi there. Could I get you to comment on this discussion? Thanks :) -- œ^™ 08:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom for Desktop Dungeons

Hi Odie, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Desktop Dungeons and there is a small issue that I noticed. Could you read my comments at the nomination page and reply there? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fisher's Ghost (film)

Thank you from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 08:03, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Not sure I understand your note. The template above was placed there by a bot working under my instructions. I didn't tell it how to do things, only what to do.... hope that helps Victuallers (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nom for Myth III

Hi Odie, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Myth III: The Wolf Age and want your feedback on yet another ALT before approving it. I will also be adding box art to the article. Please reply at the nomination page. Thanks! Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Utica Public Library

Is there a reason I can't provide more information about the library, and not have it removed? I'm not sure how public information such as our hours, location, and mission statement are biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCarlsonUPL (talk • contribs) 14:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

• (stalking): Not biased, but not encyclopedic. Please see what Wikipedia is not. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Desktop Dungeons

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

User page vandalism

I blocked the IP who just vandalized your user page for 31 hours. Would you like me to protect your user page? There's not really any reason for anyone other than you to edit it, and especially not IP editors. They would still be able to edit your talk page in case they had questions of complaints, but at least it would keep the unnecessary vandalism. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Villa Ivrea Page

Good morning. I do not know who you are, but would like to know why you have edited my page by deleting several things I added yesterday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olmos64 (talk • contribs) 07:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for helping me against vandalism! Avoided (talk) 14:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

response

how can "pull it" mean evacuate firefighters , when there were none in the building , and why not then " pull THEM" not "pull IT" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.229.7 (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello Odie5533! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 23:46, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Myth III: The Wolf Age

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Hahahaha, this one is clever. Congrats. :) Axem Titanium (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

VOID

Doesn't an article start with the original owners? I have been trying with difficulty to get some information set up and to bring it out in the open for the Void. I mentioned it is still in development and whenever I get some players in they will most likely add more info to the WIKI page here. How do I remove the Scheduled for Deletion? And I would like to see where it says that a page cannot be written by their "owners" as a rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foofah (talk • contribs) 08:54, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

"Kolti plot"

Hi - it actually appears to be in transliterated Urdu , and about a place in Punjab, Pakistan. I don't think that's going to save it from deletion, however! --Shirt58 (talk) 05:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Already gone :-) --Shirt58 (talk) 05:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I initially thought it was a foreign language but the latter part of the text seemed repetitive so it looked more like gibberish. I guess the transliteration process can do that sometimes. --Odie5533 (talk) 05:15, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for University of Lomé

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Followup to Dragon Warrior FAC

I'm looking through the stuff you mentioned and there is one point I'd like to follow up on. You asked if the game could be completed without saving the princess. I can say that it can, but I would have to cite the game itself (or leave it uncited with the assumption that its the game the article is talking about). The story changes slightly. I'm not sure given how unlikely that is to occur, if that would be considered something that would require a secondary source. If so, there is no RS that covers that; if not, like I said, I can use the game itself.陣内_Jinnai 19:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I saw the page was changed, and I agree that since the normal progression of the game includes rescuing her then the plot section should reflect this. --Odie5533 (talk) 20:55, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for How to Train Your Dragon (franchise)

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

FC Twin

Hey saw you helped fix the FC Twin page. Very cool. I'm trying to help. I'm adding all the games I test personally so hopefully we can make the page a little more detailed and accurate!! Anyway I am assuming you're a gamer as well. Yes?

Akasha&Alucard (talk) 02:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I consider myself a gamer, although I admittedly spend a lot more time reading about video games than I do actually playing them. The change I made to the FC Twin page was just disambiguation, so not really that big. Looking at the page now, I noticed it has two big compatibility lists; both of these lists actually need to be deleted. The problem with them is that there is no citation for them, and as the list proclaims, they are original research which is not allowed on Wikipedia. I found some good sources to use on the article (Destructoid, Ars Technica 1, Ars Technica 2) but I don't have time to integrate them right now. --Odie5533 (talk) 03:09, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Well I tested the majority of them personally, and others I watched get tested on YouTube and such. How do I provide a citation for the lists? I'd hate to have all my work be deleted. Is there an easier way to talk here than using this thing? Very frustrating trying to get used to it lol. Akasha&Alucard (talk) 00:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Go Vacation

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The Void Browsergame

Man, you suck. This whole wiki shit is absolute crap.

Patrin and Hammer to Nail

Hi! I started a thread on WP:RSN more than a week ago regarding the reliability of Patrin and Hammer to Nail for their usage in articles on indi cinema and the Roma. I have got only one response so far, but that is from an editor already involved with Korkoro. What is your say on this? _morelMW^illiam 05:22, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I left a reply on the board. --Odie5533 (talk) 16:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

test pages and 'flaggable' sources

Hi Odie, thanks for the message! Do you know if there is a way for me to move that page ? I'm not clear what WP's mechanism is for creating pages, and have no idea how to move them, but I'd really like to know.

By the by, what did you think of the idea? ( eg having a list of might-not-be-credible sources ) Was the idea clear, did the description make sense to you? thanks, Jjk (talk) 16:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

For September Dab Challenge

The Video game Barnstar

---

Congratulations on placing in the September Dab Challenge. Thank you for taking the time to improve the inter-article navigation within our project. Just wanted to let you know that your efforts do not go unnoticed and are appreciated. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC))