User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2012/5
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Timotheus Canens. 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. |
The Signpost: 30 April 2012
- Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Consultant: Pete Forsyth
- Discussion report: 'ReferenceTooltips' by default
- WikiProject report: The Cartographers of WikiProject Maps
- Featured content: Featured content spreads its wings
- Arbitration report: R&I Review remains in voting, two open cases
Aaack
[1] Thanks. I'm evidently not really great with details, even if my intentions are good. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Input request
Hi Timotheus, could I please request your input at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 May 4? I'm contacting you because it's a deletion review involving Chinese-language sources. All the best—S Marshall T/C 16:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
ViSalus Article
I have been going through and seeing if there are articles that were proposed for deletion that I could possibly save and came across ViSalus. I see that there was a lengthy discussion about the article prior to it being deleted (looks like you were the one who banged the final gavel after the discussion was over). I have done some more research on this company and it looks like it is more notable than the original editor was able to cite. I am wondering if there is anything specific about the original article that needs improvement and if you can provide me with an archive of the original article to work from. Thanks in advance. --Morning277 (talk) 12:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Userfied to User:Morning277/ViSalus. You'd probably want to improve on it in your userspace and then get a review at WP:DRV. T. Canens (talk) 01:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank You! I have also had a request HERE for a couple of days. I am not sure who to contact to have this reviewed. Any assistance that you may be able to provide would be appreciated. I apologize for continuously bugging you but I did not think this was something for the Admin Notice Board. --Morning277 (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 May 2012
- Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Communicator: Phil Gomes
- News and notes: Hong Kong to host Wikimania 2013
- WikiProject report: Say What?: WikiProject Languages
- Featured content: This week at featured content: How much wood would a Wood Duck chuck if a Wood Duck could chuck wood?
- Arbitration report: Proposed decision in Rich Farmbrough, two open cases
- Technology report: Search gets faster, GSoC gets more detail and 1.20wmf2 gets deployed
Deletion request
Hi, I see you are admin. I want User talk:NGC 2736/common.js, User:NGC 2736/common.js, User talk:NGC 2736/huggle.css, User:NGC 2736/huggle.css, User:NGC 2736/vector.js, User:NGC 2736/monobook.js, User:NGC 2736/twinkleoptions.js be deleted. I tried to add the CSD tag (db-user) to these pages, but what I can see is that the CSD tag does not work in these pages. So I am requesting you to delete these pages. Thank you! --NGC 2736 (talk) 07:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Actually, the template won't expand, but it will actually put them into the correct speedy deletion category, so it will still be seen and deleted. Anyway,
Done. T. Canens (talk) 08:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! --NGC 2736 (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
DeFacto socks
I see that you mentioned the possibility of a range block. 94.197.49.214 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is the latest. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Good catch here. Pine(talk) 07:10, 14 May 2012 (UTC) |
The Signpost: 14 May 2012
- WikiProject report: Welcome to Wikipedia with a cup of tea and all your questions answered - at the Teahouse
- Featured content: Featured content is red hot this week
- Arbitration report: R&I Review closed, Rich Farmbrough near closure
AFC move to salted page
Can you please move Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Afranet to Afranet? Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- I actually made a request for unprotection here. Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- Replied there. T. Canens (talk) 02:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- Replied. I do think that secondary sources are currently on the short side; however, the article is written from a neutral point of view and could suffer from systematic bias. A search for the Persian افرانت does reveal more results than the English Afranet. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- The editor, User:ChazzI73, posted on his talk page with other references. After he includes the material, he will want to submit again. Other editors seemed to comment that the only way it could be created now would be to take it to WP:DRV; however, after looking through the instructions, it seems that deletion review would be inappropriate. When I read it, it appeared like deletion review was only for restoring deleted content. What should I tell the editor to assist him? Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Replied. I do think that secondary sources are currently on the short side; however, the article is written from a neutral point of view and could suffer from systematic bias. A search for the Persian افرانت does reveal more results than the English Afranet. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- Replied there. T. Canens (talk) 02:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to ask you a question with regard to the thread at WP:AE concerning the above article: [2] Do you think it is Ok to move the posts by other editors around, like Aregakn did here: [3]? I think this broke the whole structure of discussion, and some texts posted lost coherence because they were posted in response to certain things said in other postings. I don't wanna make any reverts there, I would appreciate if someone looked into this. Regards, Grandmaster 18:35, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 May 2012
- From the editor: New editor-in-chief
- WikiProject report: Trouble in a Galaxy Far, Far Away....
- Featured content: Lemurbaby moves it with Madagascar: Featured content for the week
- Arbitration report: No open arbitration cases pending
- Technology report: On the indestructibility of Wikimedia content
Articles for Creation Appeal
| Articles for Creation is backlogged and needs YOUR help!
Articles for Creation is desperately in need of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors and administrators alike, to help us clear a record backlog of pending submissions. There is currently a significant backlog of 1247 submissions waiting to be reviewed. These submissions are generally from new editors who have never edited Wikipedia before. A prompt, constructive review of submissions could significantly editor retention. 
If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. Click here to review to a random submissionArticle selected by erwin85's random article script on toolserver. We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 1 or 2 reviews, would be extremely beneficial. On behalf of the Articles for Creation project, |
Chinese stub deletions
Hi. I've contacted Plastikspork who might be able to fix the Chinese and we could possibly arrange something later to replace the short stubs with more productive articles. Can you hold off on the deletions for a week to allow us to properly arrange something on this? A lot can happen within a week.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:27, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- An overwhelming consensus to delete them was formed on May 22 or 23. That's already a week ago. I'm disinclined to allow these error-filled stubs to remain for yet another week. T. Canens (talk) 11:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- How are you deleting them so quick? --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 16:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Should have been obvious. Twinkle batch delete. T. Canens (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- How are you deleting them so quick? --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 16:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
"Wikipedia Life"
How would you translate the Chinese in this sign, which amused me recently in a Chinese bookshop? My son, moderately fluent but not a native speaker, suggested it would be something like "Lifestyle compendia". JohnCD (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hmm, 百科 in this context is kinda hard to render into English. "Compendia" is OK, or maybe "collection" (of books). Honestly, though, in context, just "Lifestyle" is probably best when you consider the usual usage in U.S. bookstores. 百科 here is more of a filler to bring up the number of characters. Chinese likes four-character phrases. A lot. T. Canens (talk) 17:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
AE question
Hi. There is an AE case here that I filed that is rather big and growing wildly out of control.
At this point it is long and confusing and seems impossible to understand or deal with (length, back-and-forth). I wonder if it would be a good idea to scrap the whole thing and refile it, with interested parties bringing only their diffs and minimalist explanation? That might simplify the process. Who makes that call? The Sound and the Fury (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- If it turn out to be too unwieldy, the admins may decide to refactor it. We are somewhat used to threads like this at AE, though. T. Canens (talk) 16:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- I didn't know that. I kind of feel sorry for you guys. Blade responded here. He says he is fine with restarting if you are. I would envisage just a very minimalist presentation focused on diffs rather than lengthy commentary or topic discussion. I screwed that up. If everyone who thinks they have a grievance then presented simply their diffs in a curt way, the adjudication process would be simpler. Maybe I can refactor mine and put it in a sandbox to show what I mean. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
What kind of phallokephalopod are you?
[4]...Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 16:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Do you actually have a question? T. Canens (talk) 17:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
You forgot to delete the talk pages.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Caucasian Albania article
Hello. You recently made a posting regarding Grandmaster's request to open up the article on 1RR basis. [5]. This may have merits but please consider User:Grandmaster motivation to do so, which is definitely based on bad faith. He wants to reopen edit war using his meatpuppet network. Only yesterday he vandalized the Nagorno-Karabakh article by removing material based on the consensus of 9 editors, and arrogantly declared about a "New start." His actions prompted EdJonston to close the article for consensus building. Grandmaster completely ignored his advice and instead tried to game the system by making sham, phony and laughable excuses to exclude the works of internationally renowned academics Patrick Donabedian, Claude Mutafian, Bagrat Ulubabyan and even Thomas de Waal from the article. And he is again deploying his meatpuppet cabal - User:Brandmeister and User:Parishan - that were used in ruwiki to support Grandmaster's disruptive actions. You can open up the article but limiting the ability of Grandmaster's meatpuppet cabal to game the system for editwarring should be curbed. This was argued previously by several users and I guess there are enough grounds now to take action against Grandmaster. Zimmarod (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 May 2012
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation endorses open-access petition to the White House; pending changes RfC ends
- Recent research: Supporting interlanguage collaboration; detecting reverts; Wikipedia's discourse, semantic and leadership networks, and Google's Knowledge Graph
- WikiProject report: Experts and enthusiasts at WikiProject Geology
- Featured content: Featured content cuts the cheese
- Arbitration report: Fæ and GoodDay requests for arbitration, changes to evidence word limits
- Technology report: Developer divide wrangles; plus Wikimedia Zero, MediaWiki 1.20wmf4, and IPv6