User talk:Thumperward/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

Spoo headers

Why do you want those two ArticleHistory entries on one line? It's a lot easier to read if everything is on its own line, that's how it's normally used. Also, I don't think that {{Talkheader}} is really needed there. It's only for talk pages that are very active or have policy problems, and that isn't the case here. Pagrashtak 14:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Just aesthetic quibbling. I don't mind however it ends up, really. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Your edit comments.

I'm curious - which encyclopedias have you read? Tedickey (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not interested in arguing qualifications with you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Whatever - will let it pass as careless wording. Tedickey (talk) 13:46, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

your comment on the Immaterium for its deletion

in one of your comment you said that it was stolen by GW from dune

dune hyperspace GW Immaterium/warp

names are not the same

and dune hyper dont have horrific monsters in it. it is not affected by sentient beings thoughts dune travvel is intentanoeus i belive Immaterium/warp can get lost for years at a time. dune works by folding normal space not entering another plane is not full of eddies and time eddies thus you can go for a to b and take 1week do it anothertime it could take 1year if ur caught up. hyperspace is also used by stargate and Babylon 5 so they ripped it even more

this aint anything personal just wanted to correct what i thought was wrong with wat you said. if im wrong and the dune hyper is full of monsters i withdraw this but they are very different -- Thebobman56 00:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know thay're not exactly the same. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Question

Umm, how can translating parts of the text in EPSXe to German be considered "vandalising"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.13.141.212 (talk) 00:29, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia. Replacing English text with a German translation is definitely not constructive. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing SQLPro

I just removed improper mark from SQLPro article put by SQLPro competitors. The article follows all Wikipedia guidelines and should not be marked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strannikk (talk • contribs) 17:58, 27 October 2008

This is not the case. Please read and follow the guidelines linked from the cleanup tags which have been placed on the article. In addition, insinuation that those placing tags on the article as "SQLPro competitors" is an assumption of bad faith, and it is clearly specious. If you have some connection to SQLPro, please also take note of Wikipedia's guidelines on when editors may have a potential conflict of interest in editing articles on subjects they have a relation to. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you work for SQLPro competitors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strannikk (talk • contribs) 17:58, 27 October 2008

I've issued a final warning. Any further removal of the maintenaince tags will result in administrative action. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

You reported 74.9.248.130 to AIV as having vandalized after a final warning. Please check over WP:WARN to see the various block templates and learn about escalating blocks. Although the user had been repeatedly warned, there were no warnings above level one or two. Level three warnings introduce block warnings, and level four warnings are the final. Let me know if you have any questions. لennavecia 19:53, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I've done a few today, and must be getting tired. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 19:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Removal of coloured backgrounds of headings

Hello, Thumperward. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox Athlete.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sidebar, talk archives

Hi again. Thanks for the note re the above; I've just left some thoughts there. You can find my talk page as it stood in previous months by looking for the "-- CLEARING POSTS BEFORE [month year] --" edits in its history. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware

REALLY trying to be NPOV and not advertising (and I know some of the stuff there is a bit overzealous). I want to make it good, and I want your opinion. Should we be looking for negative reviews of A-M (balance issue), or should I just trim the most gung-ho stuff that's already there to make it more neutral-sounding? (encyclopedic voice issue) -Fredgoat (talk) 00:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Looking at it again, it's not really promotional in tone; it just needs expanded. In general, though, it's better to remove unsourced fluff material than to add negative stuff to "add balance", as it were. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Criticism template

Thanks for splitting that! I had just completed an hour's search for a better link, but as NPOV and Words To Avoid have both changed considerably, I came up empty. The split to an essay is a nice solution. Altairah (talk) 12:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. Yeah, I think that's the best solution for now. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Ha, I came to say thanks too. Habanero-tan (talk) 17:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Xyzzzy

I have removed the {{Notability}} template you placed on the Xyzzy article. I have introduced additional citations to show it is the cannonical magic word in computing, and that it is a bad choice for a password. Although I don't have citations for it, Adventure was the computer game in the 1970s, and the very first computer game for the IBM Personal Computer model 5101; you could order it with the computer (and I did). Xyzzy was clearly the most important magic word in that game. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've tidied the rest of it up a bit. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:48, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Remaining calm

Sensible advice. Thanks. Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 15:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Format of the uw-series templates

Hello. I noticed your edits to several of the uw-series of warning templates. Are you aware that as per consensus at WP:UW and WP:UTM, we do not use hard-coded icon justification on any of the uw-series as they prevent the recommended layout from working? --Kralizec! (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I keep seeing consensus alluded to, but other than the current kerfuffle on ANI I couldn't actually see it defined anywhere. Some of the templates I'd touched already had floats anyway, and none of the test ones had icons at all. What it looks like to me is that the guidelines in question aren't followed as closely as made out. If you can point me to a current discussion then I'd be happy to pitch in. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Note that Kralizac was only referring to the templates beginning with the uw- prefix; I came here to tell you the same thing. Other warning templates are not subject to the UW standardization guidelines, although I'd be surprised if you added icons to any of the "test" templates and weren't reverted! ;)

Previous discussions regarding floating the icons in UW templates include [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. There isn't a current discussion at the moment, feel free to start one at WT:UTM if you want after reading some of those past discussions. Personally, I'd wait a few days to start any discussion until the current mess has died down, but that's up to you. Also, please consider reverting the changes to the uw-* templates you've edited (Uw-hoax, Uw-legal, Uw-longterm, Uw-npa1, Uw-npa2, Uw-npa3, Uw-npa4, Uw-npa4im, Uw-vandalism1, Uw-vandalism2, Uw-vandalism3, Uw-vandalism4, Uw-vandalism4im) until that discussion has happened. Anomie⚔ 18:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, BTW, you missed the 213 other uw-* templates when making your change! If the discussion does decide that consensus changed, we would have a script run down the entire list to make sure they were all changed. Anomie⚔ 18:39, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've reverted. It's typical that what seems like a trivial enhancement is being held back because of Internet Explorer's general incompetence. Anyway, I'll see what happens regarding wider discussion once the current drama dies down. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:46, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

In reply to Anomie above, after the When did we decide to put the left into the level 4 templates? discussion, I went through with WP:AWB and re-harmonized all (at that time) 170-ish of the templates. Certainly if we revisit the layout issue again and decide to drop the numbered warning scheme, then AWB or a similar scripted utility could be used to reinsert the hard-coded image justifications. Regardless I would like to thank Thumperward for working within the existing uw-series project framework, and especially for helping us keep the templates consistent and standardized! --Kralizec! (talk) 19:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

GNU/Linux

I don't think saying "Linux" is being neutral at all. By saying either of the terms you are not being neutral at all: you either pick rms' side or Linus' side. Linux is not an OS, it's a kernel. Wikipedia would be giving the wrong information to its readers if the "Linux" term keeps being used instead of the "GNU/Linux" term. It is plain wrong to refer to an OS by its kernel's name.

I agree with your project of consistency and that is why I changed all the articles and not just one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.55.88.19 (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with your premise anyway, but please join in the conversation at Talk:Linux/Referring to this article. There are thousands (possibly tens of thousands) of links to the subject on Wikipedia: changing a handful of pages at this point will just confuse people. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 06:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

OpenSSI and 500 MB links

Good call. I suppose the guy who added the link to the vmware image means well, which is why I hesitated to remove it myself, but really... HughesJohn (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. We're at the stage where a 90-meg TED video can just about survive an extlink cull (five years ago that would have been unthinkable), but not quite at the stage where a curious visitor may think of checking out a half-gig operating system... Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

On Edit in BOSS

Thanks! I have made made the necessary changes. Krishnachandranvn (talk) 16:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

'Merge' of Defunct Company

There does seem to be a problem with the redirect. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Replied over there. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Ubuntu

Another editor closed the peer review (which had significant commentary) and listed the article at WP:FAC, apparently without consulting with you, a significant contributor. Please let me know if you would like for me to withdraw the nomination until you're ready. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Enigma Links

Hi Chris,

Please check my last comments at the Enigma discussion page about removed links. I believe that making it impossible for users to add valuable links is a mistake that dosn't credit Wikipedia.Dirk (talk) 18:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I've left a comment on the Enigma talk page. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

never mind

I guess it's resolved now, right? No hard feelings. --dab (𒁳) 16:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Just the usual fingers-faster-than-sense drama. Here's to future productive collaboration. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

WotC

Have a look at what I've done so far at Wizards of the Coast. :) BOZ (talk) 04:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Discounting the "Web community" section, which currently looks like it could be dropped with no loss of article quality, it looks pretty great, yeah. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I was thinking of commenting out that section anyway - seems relevant enough to include if someone can find sources, but it looks completely unreferenced at the moment. BOZ (talk) 16:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Wizards of the Coast has been successfully promoted to GA status! :) Thanks for your support on this and the EGG article. I was also thinking of nominating Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms; see the project talk page for discussion on that. BOZ (talk) 19:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Chris Burke (actor)

Why would you remove something from a wikipedia article that was seen by millions of viewers? Why would you protect a violent racist? Why do YOU threaten retaliantion against anyone who doesn't see things your way? You don't even live in this country, so why are you so bent on prtotecting the image of a racist retard has-been actor and current lousy singer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.167.114.32 (talk) 11:46, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I've issued a final warning over your violation of our policy on the biographies of living persons. Any further infractions will be dealt with by administrative action. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

i got the message "This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.

The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Chris Burke (actor), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

but you still haven't explained to me how you claim that footage airted by a nationally televised program is "unsourced". i agree with you it is defamatory, but also, wikipedia is an online encylopedia - meaning good or bad, as long as the content is true, it should not be excluded because YOU feel it will harm a reputation. if you feel that only good things should be printed, then feel free to edit "adolf hitler", "john wayne gacy", "atilla the hun", "horatio alger", etc. all of these were peope who made significant deeds, and all of them have a darker side as well, that you feel, should be swept under the rug and forgotten. or are you simply arguing that when people are ALIVE, only good things should be noted abotu them? alive or dead, it does not change history or their behavior. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.167.114.32 (talk) 11:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Go and read the policy in the link I provided. Your personal recollection of a TV show is not a reliable source to us, nor am I inclined to take your word on good faith given the wording of your last comment. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

i found the answer on my own. wikipedia says "...it is essential that a determined effort be made to eliminate defamatory and other undesirable information from these articles as far as possible. On the other hand Wikipedia's standing and neutrality must not be compromised by allowing the editing of articles to show a bias in their subject's favor...". which is what YOU Are doing - showing bias in his favor. you are electing to delete history. you have taken it upon yourself to personally ensure that anyone who hasn't seen the clip on TV will never read about it on wikipedia. i'll be certain to report YOU as quickly as you have shown me the same disrespect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.167.114.32 (talk) 12:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Good luck with that. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

SQLite

Thanks for your comments and "tidying" up of the SQLite page. I am a bit concerned that that Sdfisher will try to reverse our changes as it seems he has in the past based on his belief that consistency has something to do with enforcing referential integrity. Cmbeelby (talk) 14:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. That's as may be, but if he can't find a reliable secondary source which says "SQLite is not ACID compliant" then we're not changing it. Our attitude to sourcing explicilty prohibits things from being worked out from first principle for precisely the reason that Wikipedians are fallible and sometimes fail to get that call right, as seems to be the case here. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Red Alert 3

Thanks for clearing up the securom controversy. I have added the source has you requested. Could you check. Is this website working for you?. It says network timeout for me. --SkyWalker (talk) 14:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it's working here. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

debian release graph

no idea how to find out your email address, so i'll just drop it here and you will have to deal with the vandalism ;)

hi, i just noticed that the image Debian_releases.svg and Releases.gif are outdated, there is a new version at the original site. these images get generated automatically, so perhaps it's better to reference them directly. there is also a releases.ps right next to the .gif, perhaps that is easier for you. if you want notifications of changes, or any other change to the original script, please holler. unfortunately i don't have a script to generate svg from ps yet...

robertle@semistable.com

I moved this from your user page and left a note to the user about where to put those things --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've copied it onto Talk:Debian, which is probably where it belongs. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Sidebar

Hi. In case you're still interested in this template's development, I've posted an update pointing to a plainer basic test version of Sidebar that I've justed started. The preceding post (edited), although bulky, is an attempt to address the varying-parameter-names issue. (In short, I can see why different names have arisen, so, rather than remove them, feed them as alternatives to a (hidden) set of names common to Navbox/Infobox/Sidebar: name, title1, title2, image1, image2, above, headingX, labelX, dataX, below.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 03:45, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• I think I've finished testing the more streamlined Sidebar/with dividers/with backgrounds and have realized it's probably better not to create Template:Sidebar with dividers and Template:Sidebar with backgrounds but instead incorporate the few differences they have from Sidebar into Sidebar itself. (#switch looks like the function to use on a new parameter, type, where type can be "with dividers", "with backgrounds" or default to plain.) I'll try to make some time to implement them in the next day or so. Sardanaphalus (talk) 07:43, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject: Dungeons & Dragons

Hi! I’ve been working on a lot of ‘’Dungeons & Dragons’’ articles lately and saw that you've edited some too, and am inviting you to join Wikipedia’s D&D group. I've been hard at work removing tags placed inappropriately on D&D articles, as well as modifying articles to remove tags that were placed legitimately. In addition, I have been compiling related articles together so that the articles are longer, making it easier to remove tags and to have short articles on lesser topics by just putting it into another appropriate article (links to such compiled articles can be found on my userpage). Check out the project here , and ask any questions that you may have here. Thank you for your time. Drilnoth (talk) 21:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Explain-inote

Actually we're waiting on IronGargoyle, who is going to have his bot orphan the template. It's being used on well over 100 articles. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 11:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, my bad. Cheers for the explanation. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) I think this is the second time I've had to engage a bot in the year or so I've been closing TfDs. Doesn't happen often. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 11:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Space-related infobox merges

Glad to see you are working on these merges...to be frank, its been on my to-do list but I haven't been able to make time for it. How many others are you working to merge into Infobox Spacecraft? I know we currently have headers for "Instruments" and "Orbital elements" (which I think should be changed to "Orbital data" for clearer reading), but perhaps additional ones such as "Launch data" and "Spacecraft data" for the generic stuff, a section for Moon-specific material, and if/when Infobox Telescope is merged in, a section just for the telescope data. Basically, things just feel clutters and tossed about right now, and sectioning will help organise the info. Any thoughts? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I was inspired to do the last two because they were brought to TfD, but I suppose the ultimate aim would be to combine all of the rest, yeah. And I agree that we could do with discussing the exact terminology and layout to be used, as I've been a bit haphazard in slotting things in where it's easiest to fit them. If there's any higher-level discussion on this, please send me a link! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

No higher-level discussion that I'm aware of, just you being bold and me acting as backseat driver :P If you want to discuss this on Infobox Spacecraft's talk page, that seems fine. I would imagine it would be the first place an interested party would look as well. Shouldn't be difficult to hash out a format, perhaps even identify other desired parameters. Also, it may be possible, even desired, to have a bot comb through pages which used the now-merged templates and change deprecated parameters to the ones used on Infobox Spacecraft, to present a measure of uniformity. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to give it a go at some point. Never done anything bot-related: I suppose that's something to consider in the future. Anyway, yeah, feel free to keep me in the loop if anyone else steps in. Cheers! Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You might try asking at Wikipedia:Bot requests, and see if anyone can do that chore. I'm not entirely familiar with the group, but they seem to reply quickly, and this doesn't seem like a difficult job. All merges should be completed before any such request is made, of course. Gotta sleep now, but I'll work up a possible layout for Infobox Spacecraft tomorrow if I'm not busy at work. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Infobox Spacecraft! Please remember to update the documentation Template:Infobox_Spacecraft/doc - Ravedave (talk) 20:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

iPod touch

Would it be juvenile of me to change "We use the standard rules of English (except the iSomething part) to name products." to "We use the standard rules of English (except the ones we don't) to name products."? Just seeking confirmation. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I think you know the answer to that one. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 23:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Fallout 3

Hi - I've been looking at expanding the leader section of the Fallout 3 article following your tagging. Could you comment on the changes I've made and indicate whether there is room for further improvement? Cheers. Nick Ottery (talk) 12:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Excellent work! Cheers! :) Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 16:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)