User talk:Dgw/Archives/2

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Talk page comments.

Hi, please stop reverting User talk:Liist. A user may remove comments from his own talk page if he wishes. | Mr. Darcy talk 20:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Liist continually removes warnings from his/her own talk page. Warnings should stay on talk pages, as a record of the user's actions. Liist is welcome to archive the warnings (and I have mentioned this possibility), but not to delete them outright. I have always observed other users being told not to remove legitimate warnings; why should Liist be an exception? — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 01:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You are absolutely mistaken. The removal of a warning is considered an acknowledgement that it has been read. There is NO policy that states that a user must leave warnings on his/her talk page. The fact that you are actually edit-warring - including reverting an admin's revert - over this is ridiculous. Do not restore those warnings to Liist's talk page again. | Mr. Darcy talk 05:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The purpose of a vandalism warning is not just to warn the vandal, but also to inform other people who are fighting against vandalism that the vandal is at a certain level of warning so that they can issue the appropriate warnings or ask to have him blocked. Removing the warnings interferes with the process of fighting vandalism and thus IS vandalism. JRSpriggs 07:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Now you see, that's what I thought was the reason. Do you think I should continue the reverts, Mr(s). Spriggs (I gather from your username)? I see MrDarcy has warned you, too. Such a commotion (from one admin, I notice) about what would seem to be obvious. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a Wikipedia policy expert, but from a logical standpoint I have to agree with JRSpriggs and Tuvok. The closest I could find on this was this: Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace, and it doesn't mention anything about removing warnings. IMHO, it would be logical therefore to assume they should stay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by I80and (talk • contribs) 00:11, March 7, 2007.

Users have the right to do as they wish within their user space, as long as it doesn't violate another policy (such as WP:NPA). Archiving is encouraged but not required; the removal of a warning doesn't remove it from the page's history, so its effect is cosmetic rather than permanent. There is NO policy that says that talk page messages can't be removed. Voyager, I've warned you already not to continue. | Mr. Darcy talk 00:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have talked with Persian Poet Gal and she has helped me see the difference. Last time I checked, Liist was not blocked. Now that (s)he has been indefblocked, I see no reason (per PPG's reasoning) to put the warnings back. I have, however, redirected the talk page to the userpage, since it is now an empty talk page for a blocked user. I trust that is not vandalism. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I raised this issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Reverting removal of vandalism warnings by the vandal -- is it vandalism?, in order to try to get a definitive ruling from them. JRSpriggs 11:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! I see it's garnered quite a response. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 22:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

And I hope you've both noticed that experienced users are telling you not to revert those talk-page blankings. This issue has been discussed repeatedly, and every time I've seen it come up, the answer has been the same. | Mr. Darcy talk 01:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The section has now been archived. My impression was that there was no consensus one way or the other. Consequently, I will refrain henceforth from such reversions and warnings. However, I think that it would also be appropriate, for the same reason, for you (MrDarcy) to refrain from taking actions against those who continue to enforce a prohibition on blanking warnings. Rules should not be enforced if they are not clear, including the "rule" against such enforcement actions. JRSpriggs 05:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/Voyagerfan5761

Section below copied from Wikipedia:Editor review/Voyagerfan5761 on 03/17/07

Hehe you might get many enemies if you keep telling others what to do, only a few like that. So for your own good...be careful with your comments. Cheers --– Emperor Walter Humala · ^{( shout! · sign? )} 23:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but I was expressing an opinion and making a suggestion. If you feel I was telling you what to do, I am truly sorry; my intention was only to bring a potential annoyance to your attention. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 04:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Section above copied from Wikipedia:Editor review/Voyagerfan5761 on 03/17/07

Hi Tuvok (Voyagerfan5761), you're telling me you were just making a suggestion on me, well I think you're right, maybe I got a lil rude 'cuz I was afraid they could delete my stuff. So please forgive me too, thanks! --– Emperor Walter Humala · ^{( talk? · help! )} 05:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem; I can see where that comment was coming from, considering the situation you had gotten into. At the risk of sounding too Trek-ish, "Forgiveness granted." :-)

Congratulations on having a meh result to your MfD, by the way. I'll bet you're happy about that. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Talkpage indexer

What are the instructions for your talkpage indexer? It looks like a great program, whatever it's using. Are you running a bot under your username? Also, is it approved for general use? I'd like to index my archives, too; does this indexer retroactively index archives? Thanks! This looks cool! — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 01:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It requires a number of templates to be transcluded wherever the index needs to go, and a data page set up to hold data for the index. I have written a script to update it, which I've run under my username purely for testing purposes. At the moment I'm trying to get approval to run a bot to do regular updates; I can't do anything at the moment, but I may be able to do so once the bot is approved. Indexing of archives is possible in the same way, if desired. Thanks – Qxz 01:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking forward to your getting approval. Will you let me know when the tool is up and running? Thanks! — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately I've decided to withdraw my request due to objections that I can't be bothered to address. Apologies for the inconvenience – Qxz 01:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:ADOPT input

Hello, Voyagerfan5761. The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks! V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 03:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Defences

Hey -- this isn't a typo. See defence. Hope this helps, Matthew 20:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

The page you referenced, defence, is a redirect to defense. On Wikipedia, this usually indicates a common typographical mistake. Wiktionary does have a separate definition page for wikt:defence as well as a page for wikt:defense, which would support your position. The two spellings are alternatives, so I suppose it's OK; it's just the British (or "Commonwealth" --Wikt) spelling. I'll leave it. Thanks for pointing that out! Feedback is always good ;), and I just learned another new spelling. Happy editing! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Stephen King's inspiration

Hello. The discussion will probably be closed by the time you get back, but in the interest of fair "canvassing", I'll still leave this here... Back in May you participated in an AfD discussion on Stephen King's inspiration. I have called this AfD for review as I believe it was deleted against consensus in the discussion. If you have a few moments, would you please read the review and weigh in with your current opinion? Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_22#Stephen_King.27s_inspiration Many thanks. All the best LACameraman 15:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

August 2007

(You said:) Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Mathematical proof, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 05:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I was reverting a series of anon vandalism. Got carried away and forgot to check if it had already been done. Thanks for catching it.LeadSongDog 05:50, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

That edit did have me wondering. I looked at your contributions after leaving the message and found it to be the only non-constructive (at least superficially) edit I found. Sorry about that warning; RC patrol tends to put me on automatic. Hope you'll forgive me for mislabeling you a budding editor-turned-vandal. ;) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 08:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Nothing to forgive. Thanks for helping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LeadSongDog (talk • contribs) 15:06, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 17:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Please re-register

Hello, Dgw/Archives! You are receiving this notice because the Cleanup Taskforce has been inactive, as a result of this all active taskforce members are being asked to re-register.

For more information see: Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Not Dead Yet

If you do not re-register here within 15 days of receiving this notice your name will be removed from the membership list (if you were unable to reply to this notice in time, you can just add you name back).

RJFJR 00:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Random Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 06:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! What's prompted this? Just curious... Not many people know I'm here. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I like to give random smiles every so often. I pick it by selecting someone at the top of the Recent Changes list. In this case, it was you. :) -WarthogDemon 07:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like an admirable practice. I appreciate that; I've been patrolling a lot with Lupin's Anti-Vandal tool and needed a break from the usual profanity anyway. Mind if I adopt your habit? (I, too, just randomly smiled at Woohookitty.) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Go right ahead! :) -WarthogDemon 07:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that User:57.73.16.6 [1] vandalized again. The user made inappropriate edits to Mana (musician). They've been undone, but I thought to tell you, since you warned the user here they would be blocked if they vandalized again. Should I request blocking at the noticeboard, or can you block them?

Thanks! Xiao-Mei27 14:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, I have to go through the same channels as you do to get a user blocked. I made an ARV report and reverted another recent edit the user made that appeared to be vandalism. I'd love to be able to click a Block button, but I am not an admin. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 04:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! The user has been temporarily blocked, but I believe they will continue vandalizing after their block expires. I'm going to keep an eye on the user just in case. Xiao-Mei27 14:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

As will I. Users like this tend to be persistent. Reporting vandals is my pleasure. Happy anti-vandali-izing! :P Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 15:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

137.108.145.10

Hello,

137.108.145.10 is an OpenUniversity (UK) IP, it is shared by all the wired connections here. You may contact AACS-TDS at open.ac.uk to report vandalism.

Cheers, Laurian Gridinoc (laurian at gmail.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.108.145.10 (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce

There are two articles on your desk. Please look at them and determine if they are ready to close, need more work or are outside your area of expertise. Let me know if you would like me to reassign them or if you are ready for new projects. Thank you. RJFJR 16:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Went over both. They look pretty complete now, though I am by no means an expert on either subject. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at METEOSAT and see if it is ready to be closed. Please leave a message on my talk page with your opinion. Thank you. RJFJR 16:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

It looks pretty thorough. I can't think of any information I missed while reading the article. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 20:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Project invitation! [And comment]

- And I also had a quick look through your blog, very cool [Oh and I also partook in your poll, Enterprise all the way!] Scarian^Talk 22:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite. Unfortunately I know approximately nothing when it comes to debate. Happy to have been invited, though.

About the blog, thanks for reading. I don't get much traffic. The comment was especially welcome. :) I'm just waiting for it to take off like Lifehacker, Penguin Pete, etc.

One more thing, about your signature. Between "Scar" and "ian" you have an unnecessary </font><font color="black" face="tahoma">, which would provide the same result if it were removed. Just a suggestion for shortening your signature. Cheers! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Really? I didn't realise that about my signature, thanks for the heads up I'll get on it at some point.

Debating - I know nothing of debate, either. I only joined after realising the project had only its founding member and I felt sorry for him. Which, I assume, is probably a bad reason for joining a WikiProject!

I'm sure your blog will take off! Advertise it to other programmer's. That'll practically guarantee some traffic :-)

Take care my friend! Scarian^Talk 09:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup taskforce

I added Star Trek Customizable Card Game to [[your desk. Please look at it and determine if it is ready to close, accept it, reject it or let me know and I'll reassign it. RJFJR 15:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Regretfully, I have no knowledge of card games, Trek-related or otherwise. Sorry! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 18:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Tzofei Tel Aviv

Good job of solving the problem with references in Tzofei Tel Aviv. The real problem is that you were spoofed ... the NUMBER ONE "1" and lower case LETTER ELL "l" often look the same. If you look carefully (use a different font), the name of the main reference is "ttnl042806" (lower case ELL) while the subsequent reference is "ttn1042806" (number ONE). That's why the second reference didn't work. A "Compare selected versions" from the "History" page shows the difference on my Firefox browser. It's a fairly common occurrence, and one that cyber-criminals take illegally take advantage of people. Good editing. Truthanado 14:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I actually found the reference much earlier this year, and coming back to it, wondered what the heck the 10 was for. Looking back, I realize it was "l0" (man, that looks like "10"), with the "l" being part of "nl" for "newsletter". Kind of a dumb mistake, but it's fixed. I guess I'll just leave the ref name unless I change the article again. Should have used a more intuitive name... :) Thanks for explaining it though; it was kind of bugging me. Cheers! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 14:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

AWB on custom wiki

Hi there!

In an archived AWB discussion you asked if it was possible to use AWB on a local wiki. I don't know why you got told that it doesn't work, as it does. I just started to fool around with AWB and one of the first things was to see if I can run it on the development copy of my wiki, hosted on my PC. In AWB, under General / Preferences, choose Custom for the project, and enter the full URL of your wiki - mine is /localhost/testwiki/ (localhost alone will not work). You should create a new user for AWB (for example TestBot) and give it bot status under Special:User rights management. Make sure your MediaWiki version is high enough so that it includes the API for bots - I use 1.10 and it works fine.

Hope this helped -- Dunee 13:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Unfortunately, I can't seem to make it work. I'm using AWB 4.1.2.0 and trying to access MW 1.11.0, but it keeps telling me something about the URL not being in the proper format. I've tried "/localhost/w/", "localhost/w/", "/localhost/wiki/", and "localhost/wiki/", plus tried leaving out the trailing slash on everything. Nothing seems to work. This is really weird... Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 19:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Gmail article

Much wikilove for keeping on top of the Gmail article, keeping it up to date, as well as keeping the sources updated! Martijn Hoekstra 10:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikilove to you, too, for all your contributions. I've seen your name around more than a few times. Sometimes my night-owl lifestyle pays off; I caught that blog post literally fifteen minutes after it was published. I must have done something good... Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 10:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I did some work on the sources in the past, when there were a lot of unsourced statements, and cleaned up the critisism section to make it resemble something like a coherent story, rather than a long list of things people don't like about gmail, with proper sources. It's still not there, and the section still could use some good editing, but I'm sure that will be done someday. Martijn Hoekstra 11:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Criticism sections are often difficult to fit in the rest of the article, I've noticed. Oftentimes, I'll read an article, then come upon a criticism section and wonder why it sounds so different. I guess that's why Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. :) I knew I'd seen your name in the Gmail history... Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 11:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome some feedback

Hello, my name is Isucheme and I am currently writing my first Wikipedia article on the Churchill-Bernstein Equation. The equation is used to find an average (convection) heat transfer coefficient to use in Newton’s Law of cooling for a cylinder in cross flow, and the mass transfer analogy, as described in the article, can be employed to find a mass transfer coefficient. I would appreciate any feed back you can give me on my article so I can make it a great article. Thank you. Isucheme 20:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I've reviewed the article and made a few formatting and spelling corrections. I noticed you were often creating links like [[Correlation|correlation]] when only [[correlation]] would be necessary. Just minor things that shorten the wikicode and make the article easier to read in editing mode. Also, the Manual of Style says headings should be sentence case (that is, capitalize only the first letter and proper nouns), another minor issue. For a full detail of the things I changed, see the diff between the revisions.

Not having any real knowledge of that field of study, I can't grade the content much, but it looks quite good. Thanks for the contribution, and I look forward to seeing your username in the change logs more often! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, one thing I forgot to mention above (and that won't show up in the diffs in the current MediaWiki version) is that you had a lot of extra spaces, such as at the ends of lines and between sentences. Wikipedia will only show one space, no matter how many you put in, so in general, it's good to only put in the one. There are some exceptions, but it makes a good general rule. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

reverting vandalism is not edit warring.

please review user WiiCameToWiki's edit history. this is simple vandalism. 3RR does not apply. Anastrophe 07:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It does not look like simple vandalism to me. It looks like a content dispute. The phrases removed and reinserted with each revert appear controversial. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

please review both the user's edit history, and the bonds article page history. that sentence is the product of considerable cooperative editing. WiiCameToWiki is pushing a POV that i successfully stopped being pushed when i asked for semi-protection a couple of weeks ago. apparently, this previously anonymous vandal decided to take the leap to 'user' vandal and continue. this is vandalism, not a content dispute. again, his edit history speaks for itself. i believe mine does as well. Anastrophe 07:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Now that I consider it more carefully, I realize my mistake. I have removed the erroneous warning from your talk page. Sorry for any aggravation I've caused you. I am unsure of how to un-request protection; is it a matter of simply removing the section? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

i certainly understand - at first blush, it appeared the edit was a relatively banal editorial change - it takes a bit more scrutiny to really see what was being attempted. i did misidentify it as 'simple' vandalism - more like 'crafty' vandalism! i suspect just removing the request for protection will work, so long as your edit summary explains it adequately. thanks for your patience in this matter! Anastrophe 07:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. I've acquired a thick skin of sorts just for use on Wikipedia. :) I've removed the protection request, and WiiCameToWiki seems to be staying low, though I've got my figurative eye on "it." Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 08:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

User:WiiCameToWiki

Content disputes are not vandalism, and as I said to Anastrophe., please do not report content disputes as vandalism. Neil ☎ 11:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I notice you blocked the user after all. Did someone else make a subsequent report that changed your mind? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 00:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject on closed proxies

Hello Voyagerfan5761,

Since you expressed interest in being a participant in WikiProject Closed Proxies, I'm notifying you that I have created the project at Wikipedia:WikiProject on closed proxies. We're currently in closed beta; during this time, we'll bring several proxies online and ensure everything is working before accepting applicants.

Hope to see you helping the effort!

Shadow1 (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's off to a good start. Not sure if I'll be able to set up a proxy, since I can't find any spare computers lying around the house, and don't have the money to get one. Are there other things I can do to help the project? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 00:34, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Just wanted to say "Hello, Mr. Vulcan". lol I LOVE Voyager!!! --Crash Underride 18:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Side note...how do I get the status thing like you have on your page...mine would have to say like Tom Paris or Chakotay. lol --Crash Underride 18:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The status message is one of two pages used in conjunction with a user script in monobook.js. I suppose the script is optional, but it makes the status easier to update. You can copy the code from the "Misza13's Status Switcher" section in my JS code, modify the page names and statuses (a few details here), and create the pages. (You're welcome to copy mine and modify them with your own text/colors.) The hardest part was making the formatting work OK, and I've already done that. ;) You'll also need to insert another line, importScript("User:Voice of All/Addtabs/monobook.js"); in your monobook.js. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:55, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

PS: Looking forward to Star Trek XI?

Replaceable fair use Image:Opera Black Gmail.png

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Opera Black Gmail.png. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 01:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I see you were the deleting admin of File:Black-gmail-opera-948759832748237568732648761532987587465.png, the file "my" image superseded. I did not create the image, nor did I have anything to do with it except a renaming per request logged in Category:Images for renaming. If the image really should be deleted, please notify the original uploader, whose username should be available in the deleted history of Black-gmail-opera....png. Just out of curiosity, why was the original image never marked as invalid fair use? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you uploaded the clearly named new version of the article and, since you're an active contributor, I made the assumption that you were working with the related article. My apologies for the hasty assumption, I'll notify the original uploader instead. Oh, and this image was tagged as replaceable because it is possible to create a similar illustration out of freely licensed software, not just the copyrighted web content utilized by gmail. Regards, ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 04:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I would have found the original uploader myself, but non-admin user status hath its limits. I'll be watching the associated article to see what replacement is found; this should be interesting. No apologies are necessary, but they're appreciated even if unwarranted. ;-) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 05:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

PS: I like your talk link. It looks network-y.

Pope Alexander VI

Hi Voyagerfan

First, thanks for being an editor and doing some of the dirty work. I know I get a lot more out of Wikipedia than I put in, so I'm grateful for guys like you making it what it is.

I'm writing 'cause I was quite surprised to see that you'd taken out the edit I put in to the article on Pope Alexander VI (his portrayal in the Borowczyk movie Contes Immoraux). Not that I'm taking any offence - I don't think it's a piece of info that'll be missed by any serious scholar of Papal history; but it seems no less valid or relevant than any of the other film and TV representations - why the removal?

Regards

James Austin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drjamesaustin (talk • contribs) 05:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, your contributions history doesn't show any edits to Pope Alexander VI. Are you referring to this revert of an edit by 121.44.82.114? If so, I performed that removal because I was on vandalism patrol, using AVT to filter the Recent changes page for vandalism. IP edits containing content like that aren't often benevolent; they're usually calculated (or not) attempts at defamation of the article's subject. The keyword there was "incest." As it appears that Immoral Tales (film) confirms the addition, I've reverted my reversion. Thanks for letting me know! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Vulcan

I now have Mozilla FireFox and the pop ups are now working :D ya lol --Crash Underride 19:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Good to hear! Have fun popping up. ;) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 04:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh I am. :D --Crash Underride 15:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

NASCAR Fan24's Secret Page!

		The Secret Page Detective Award
		This user has found NASCAR Fan24's secret page! Congratulations!

Nope, that isn't cheating, but it's clever! NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 12:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought it was clever, too. ;) Another award to add to my userpage. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 21:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce

Please feel free to assign yourself tasks from the list of unassigned tasks at Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce. Arranging assignments is too much work for me to do by myself. We have a large backlog of unassigned tasks and there is probably something in there that will interest you. RJFJR 22:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:LACMTA System Map.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:LACMTA System Map.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. –Dream out loud (talk) 05:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC) –Dream out loud (talk) 05:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Kuzlina

Regarding my(vondeliusc) article on kuzlina; perhaps it is better suited to wikitionay. I am a novice and just felt that this was something new people would be curious about. I personally use wikipedia frequently for learning. Please delete the article if you feel it is necessary and edit/edit out my changes. No response is necessary. My reason was an intention of helpfulness. sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vondeliusc (talk • contribs) 06:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

There is no harm in creating an article that gets deleted. If a new article is something notable, it'll be kept, and will be a valuable addition to the encyclopedia. If it's not, then it gets deleted and there is no harm done. An intention of helpfulness is what we need around here; feel free to continue creating articles, once you read the Wikipedia policies on notability and What Wikipedia is not. Editing existing articles is also always welcome. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 07:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Minor Edit

Thanks for all the clean up work on article Spam (food). Just one simple comment, your last edit marked minor really should not have been marked minor due to the extent of the edits, even though most of them, on there own would have been considered minor. See Wikipedia:Minor edit. Thanks again for your extensive work on the article. Dbiel ^(Talk) 02:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

As I did not modify any content (with the exception of changing a few link targets from URL versions to wikitext versions) and was merely fixing spacing, capitalization, and typos, how does it qualify as a major edit? I am genuinely curious, since the minor edit help page says that these are minor changes. Please explain this to me, so I can continue to improve my Wikipedia editing skills. Thanks in advance, Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 03:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually this is kinda in the grey zone as the edits do appear to be minor, but simply click on the last edit link in my first post and notice how extensive it is. I personally lean on the very conservative side, and I am sure that some would agree that the use of the minor edit button was fine in this case. An edit summary that simply said "This is a series of minor edits" would be very appropriate. But when a lot of minor edits are done in a single edit, I believe that the minor edit button should not be used. Keep in mind that there is no such thing in Wikipedia as a simple edit. There are only two classes of edits; minor edits and major edits. I would be interested in hearing if you would agree with me or not, as it could easily be said that this is my POV and not a Wikipedia Policy. The question is simply, where does one draw the line between a minor edit and a regular edit. The only real purpose for the minor edit button is to "hide" the minor edits from those who do not want their watch list filed with minor edits that they have no intention at looking at.

Officially the policy reads:

The distinction between major and minor edits is significant because editors may choose to ignore minor edits when reviewing recent changes; logged-in users might even set their preferences to not display them. If you think there is any chance that another editor might dispute your change, please, do not mark it as minor.

I am looking forward to hearing what you think Dbiel ^(Talk) 04:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The point of view that a batch of minor edits done all at once is not a minor change is a new viewpoint to me. I marked the edit minor because I was not changing any article content, merely removing needless spaces, capitalizing (and lowercasing) links and markup tags (like <ref>), and correcting a few cases of URL-bar-to-edit-box link copying. All in all, changes that probably nobody would ever want to look at, since the default MediaWiki diff view wouldn't even show half the changes I made (see Bug 3894). I do somewhat disagree with your POV, since space-only changes marked as major drive me batty, but perhaps I should have marked it major because of the changes I made to the links. (I also see now that I missed an instance of ref tag capitalization...)

Suffice it to say that I personally mark as minor any edit which I do not believe would interest anyone, specifically edits that only change spacing, typos, and hidden markup (such as comments and tag capitalization). I may be on the liberal side of this fence, but since Wikipedia gets thousands of edits every day, marking a few of them minor cuts the workload for RC patrol users just a bit. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 04:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your POV. Keep up the good work. Dbiel ^(Talk) 07:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Editor review

Hi there. I left you a comment at your editor review...I don't know whether you would still like people to leave you comments there as it's been open a long time so feel free to move my comments to your talk page if you'd prefer. Happy editing!

Seraphim ^Whipp 13:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Meh, best to keep all the comments in one place. It keeps them together and easy to find, and it clears my talk page and archives for things unrelated to editor feedback, such as mistakes and controversies. Speaking of mistakes, my latest MfD (User:Comrade 47) was one. I've withdrawn the nom, but I don't know if I can make it "official." Anything I should do? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 18:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

PS: Thanks for commenting! I haven't had feedback in a while (though I was gone for a few months).

I closed the discussion so that's taken care of :). Don't worry about mistakes, we are only human and mistakes are a vital part of the learning process. I look forward to seeing you around the 'pedia :) .

Seraphim ^Whipp 22:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Smile

SJP:Happy Verterans Day! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

McAfee SiteAdvisor

Just noticed that the criticism was removed by someone earlier this afternoon - it lasted three days which was at least two and a half days longer than I thought it would. nancy 18:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Rbe2004 undid it, too, and made some changes, like adding a citation. One citation. From a forum. I think I'll go delete it again... We'll see if my deletion lasts longer than Cuchullain's.

Don't know if you've ever used the service, but I liked it better when SiteAdvisor was its own company... McAfee's commercialized it way too much. But I won't put that in the article; I'll save it for a blog idea, don't worry. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 04:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No I've never used it - I (foolishly?) rely only on common sense; it will be my downfall one day no doubt. Good luck with the blog idea, you may find yourself removing a link to it from the article some time. Kind regards, nancy 10:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Meh, it's not as useful to me as WOT (which doesn't appear to have an article yet -- will have to remedy that sometime). As for my blog, you really think some anon will find my article, remember that there's a WP article on it, and add a link? I'd be flattered to get the attention. Too bad I couldn't just leave the link in if it was added; that would be a nice traffic boost. :P Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 19:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for tagging User:Ronnalyn anuyo. I totally forgot about that tag, so thanks. I came across the account and it was more blatant than any I had seen so I figured I would consult an admin but thanks!!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 18:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No prob. Actually, Twinkle helped me remember that tag, so it's not entirely me. AzaToth had something to do with it. Cheers! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 19:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

jann haworth

Hello Voyagerfan5761. I just left a message for you but Delldot tells me I went to the wrong page. I gather you placed the tag on my above article saying that it needs editing for grammar etc. I am a new contributor to Wikipedia but an English professor and wondered if you could tell me specifically what grammatical errors or other shortcomings you see in the article.Severy (talk) 23:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Ooh... That's a good question. I tagged that article a month ago; I don't really remember the reasons. From what I just skimmed, and from vague memories (I did spend some time cleaning it up a bit, after all), I notice that some of the phrasing and sentences are a bit difficult to understand. It's nothing I wanted to tackle myself, because, being unsure of the intended meaning of the sentences in question, any attempt by me to rewrite them would most probably result in some change in the intended meaning, which would be passed to future editors and eventually perhaps make the article mean something completely different. I thought it best to leave the cleanup to editors more familiar with the subject.

That said, I don't see any grammatical errors per se; the spelling is also quite good. I'm about to fix a few incomplete entries in the list, and the article needs to be broken into sections (it's rather long for one section). Generally speaking, if you get it going in the right direction, I can probably help keep it going there, correcting style and such as it goes along.

Also, I notice you're using an IP address. Did you forget to sign in? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I have over 20 references to the artist in British periodicals from the 60's. How should I incorporate them? Please state the sentences or sections you found difficult to understand.Severy (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

If you have references in periodicals, you should include them as footnotes, like the ones already in the article. You can create footnotes with the <ref name="refname"> and </ref> tags. Within those, you should use a citation template appropriate for the source (news articles are around the middle of the table).

On going over the article now, I actually can't find any examples of difficult-to-understand sections. Perhaps I was just having a hard day last month. I'll just take the {{copyedit}} tag off. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 22:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

PS: Your username, I notice just now, matches the last name of Mrs. Haworth's husband. Is he the person to whom I am speaking? Just curious...

Thanks for the advice on the periodical references and for removing the tag. Yes, I am Jann's husband. Well spotted! Severy (talk) 20:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. I think I'll ignore the potential conflict of interest implications of your relationship to the article's subject; you've written a masterful article, and all entirely neutral point-of-view, so there don't appear to be any COI concerns at all. Thanks for the contributions! Now, just a simple reminder to sign in when you're editing; your edits will be attributed to you, rather than the IP address of wherever you're writing from. Cheers! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Conversation continues in next archive

Tech Barnstar

im in ur Wikipedia editin ur scriptz! Seriously though, thank you muchly for the barnstar and all of the great ideas you keep coming up with! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 16:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

No prob! It's you that has to code them. :) I think that's the first barnstar I've given, so additional congratulations are in order. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 18:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For suggesting Friendly's new "welcome from diff" feature and saving the hour I spent learning XPath from being wasted. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 15:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

"Shucks, folks, I'm speechless." Thanks, Ioeth! I'll try and keep it up. :) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 15:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Mic Wright

Conversation started from this response on Nancy's talk page:

Just as a side note, Nancy, the article on Jann Haworth was written by her husband, and it's quite objective from where I sit. Being related doesn't mean biased necessarily. Meanwhile, I'll go see if I can find the edits this conversation is concerning. :P Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 15:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Please provide note text!

Thanks for the comment. I'm just writing a (rather long) reply to WMike. I agree that the article does not appear to be biased but do think the COI tag should stay until it has been properly sourced. I am going to help him with that. Cheers, nancy 15:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

In your thinking, should I tag Jann Haworth with a COI as well, just as a precaution? That article has many references, so I'm not quite as sure. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 15:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Losing track of wher this conversation is!! My reply is here [2] nancy 16:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

(Comment moved from User talk:Nancy)

It's a difficult one. Jann Haworth looks fine but can we overlook the fact that it was written by her husband? Could that result in a subtle spin being put on things which might not be obvious to a casual observer? I find this really hard as my natural instinct is to assume the best of people but if you are writing about a subject who you are intimately related is it really possible to be completely impartial even with the best of intentions? nancy 15:56, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I've just put a COI tag on the article. Other editors will probably look at it and provide their own opinions on whether or not the article is NPOV. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 16:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that is perfectly reasonable course of action. Sorry about the randomness of the location of my replies - I had too many wiki-windows open, lost track of what was what and ended up in an edit conflict with myself on my own talk page when I thought that I was editing yours!! nancy 16:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about the location mix-up. If nothing else, it gave me a little laugh and something to move. I'll continue watching the article to see if anyone flags problems with it. Thanks for the advice, Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 17:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Hyperhidrosis page edits

Hi Voyagerfan5761. I saw that you removed some edits that I made to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperhidrosis so I thought that I would write to you.

I am a little new to Wikipedia, so please bear with me. I just recently volunteered my time to help the International Hyperhidrosis Society (IHHS) maintain a clean Wikipedia article on Hyperhidrosis (a pretty severe health condition that involves excessive sweating). IHHS is a Section 501 certified non-profit (like the American Cancer Society) and has the documentation with the US federal government to support it. I would be willing to provide this evidence if requested; just so that you know, that's how I was introduced to this health condition and became interested in supporting the hh community.

There has been a persistent pattern of link-spamming on the page. Two links have been added time and again:

http://excessivesweating-treatment.com/ Non-Profit Excessive Sweating Treatment Blog http://www.megadry.com/excessive-sweating-info.html Hyperhidrosis or excessive sweating treatments, Causes and Information

Moreover, the link to the IHHS website has been repeatedly removed. We were first made aware of this from another Wiki user: JakeIHHS. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hyperhidrosis&diff=170167751&oldid=164475021 I’m not sure, but I think that Jake might also volunteer for the society.

excessivesweating-treatment.com is described as a “Non-Profit Excessive Sweating Treatment Blog”. However, I understand that links to blogs violate wikipedia policy. Moreover, that blog is not maintained by a Section 501 non-profit organization. I requested certification of their non-profit stats via my talk page, but I was never answered. The link to megadry.com is a simple and obvious case of link spamming according to Wikipedia policy.

I Googled the username of the Wiki account, “whynothestars”, and I found a ton of link spamming for Hyperhidrosis. You may see for yourself. This page in particular was very telling: http://www.pr.odigio.us/home/user/11 You can see that this person created the website megadry.com. This page, http://programmermeetdesigner.com/user/profile/WhyNotTheStars/, explains that “whynothestars” performs search engine optimization. That would seem to paint a pretty clear picture of 'whynothestars" motivation.

I did recently realize that I should not have made three edits to a page in one day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule). I just learned about this policy today and I am happy to follow it. However, I was trying to follow the procedures outlined here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam) and submit the Hyperhidrosis page for “Page Protection”.

My ultimate goal is to ensure that visitors to wikipedia are not taken advantage of, and that they get useful, unbiased information about the condition with being sent to spam links.

I would love your help with this, even if it is just a point in the right direction.

Sincerely,

Tim Carter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim Carter Pedrera (talk • contribs) 19:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

By my interpretation, links to blogs are allowed so long as they are reliable. Several company blogs are cited in articles such as Gmail, for instance. And you are perfectly within rights to edit an article more than three times per day; 3RR only applies if you are reverting another user's edits (see Wikipedia:Edit war). That's what is prohibited. You can make as many edits as you like; strings of five or more are not uncommon.

From looking at the article history, you do not appear to have violated any policies. I noticed that after my edit, another user removed all the links from the page, an obvious case of vandalism. Since you seem to know much more about the article's subject that I do, perhaps you should take a look at the (as of my last edit) three links and see if they are OK, adding or removing as is appropriate. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 21:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help. I felt a little disappointed by the experience of trying to clean up this page so far. Your positive assistance has been a nice change of pace, and I’m really getting into wikipedia. Thanks again! Tim Carter Pedrera (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)