User talk:BigDT/archive200703

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive. Please do not modify it. Leave new comments on my talk page.

Quick links: Main page • My Contributions • Talk to me • Jun 06 • Jul 06 • Aug 06 • Sep - Dec 06 • Jan 07 a • Jan 07 b • Feb 07 • Mar 07

Contents 1 John Funder 2 Scoutwiki, InterWiki, Wikia & so on 3 "The Game (fad)" 4 Responding to a comment 5 Pokemon etc. 6 Essjay's departure of Wikipedia 7 Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day! 8 Kyle Eckel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) 9 John Funder (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) 10 Image uploader AIV 11 Scout gallery 12 Your user page 13 User talk:Groanio 14 ScoutWiki Network 15 ScoutWiki 16 Barnstar 17 Reply 18 Speedy Delete Tag 19 College Basketball Project 20 trolling 21 Don Murphy 22 My RfA 23 fair use in portals

John Funder

I should liek to pont out that the anonymous user is upto his tricks again.Please look at the history page.I have restored the book link but he had deleted it earlier.(Delhite 06:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC))

This is a content dispute. It isn't vandalism and it isn't tricks. Would you like for me to protect the article so that it can be worked out on the talk page instead of just reverting back and forth? The other option would be dispute resolution. You could open a request for comment regarding the page. But it isn't vandalism to remove that passage and honestly, it really needs to be sourced better than just that one somewhat doubtful book. If a judge made a ruling, is there a link to the case somewhere? Are there any news articles? Anything? --BigDT 07:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I visited John Funder page again and saw the relentless editing this time -in fact I was surprised to see your comments there as I had assumed you felt it did deserve to be there.But there still seems to be a dispute whether book can be cited.I read your comments and feel it may be best working it out on the talk page-let's see what Delhite feels.But I am worried at the general tenor of these edits emanating form Monash University IP's.Quite a few pages have suffered.(Delhite 06:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC))

Hi again.The UP govt. gazette refrs to the judgement but not teh details-it does not usually do.Here is the link;

http://www.archive.org/download/GovernmentGazetteOfUttarPradesh/HTM/00000272.htm

Scoutwiki, InterWiki, Wikia & so on

Hi back !

I saw you created an account and posted on ScoutWiki forum. As we proposed here, if you have difficulties to customize Scouting.wikia, or in implementing interwiki links, it is possible to create your own wiki at http://en.scoutwiki.org, for you to administrate it, as the english-speaking wiki of scoutwiki network.

Feel free to come back on ScoutWiki forum to discuss about that, or with one of us by IM.

Cedsib 16:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been out of town today ... I'm waiting to here from Wikia about their capabilities ... I'll get back with you this weekend. --BigDT 06:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

"The Game (fad)"

What did you mean, "...deleted eleventy billion times under different names"?

What is wrong with an article such as that one?

Preston47 17:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Game (game) (6th nomination). An article on that topic was deemed inappropriate by the community. It has been frequently recreated and deleted. --BigDT 06:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Responding to a comment

You left a note on my talk page that I thought warranted a response: "Please be careful when saying "rvv" - rvv means "revert vandalism" and any effort to improve the encyclopedia - even if ill-conceived (like the thing about the T next to the V) is not vandalism. Also, despite what you see on Sabre, VT hasn't been known as VPI in 35 years."

My response is that I interpreted the additions regarding the vandalism of UVA's facilities as being vandalism here because of the timing of the additions, the fact that it was done right after ESPN mentioned it, the fact that it was verbatim in two articles, and the fact that it was not put in any VPI-related articles (which, if it were such a big part of a rivalry, it would be). My use of "rvv" in that context was a good-faith summary of how I interpreted the intent of the edit given the totality of the circumstances. It didn't have anything to do with the act itself being childish and stupid so much as it did with the combination of things I just noted; I mean, the thing in Scott Stadium was in 2005 and someone suddenly decides to add it the day after it was shown on ESPN. Fishy timing, that's all.

Regarding VPI, the school's name is still "Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State (sic) University," so "VPI" remains fully appropriate even if their administration has tried to distance themselves from it. I'm not going to revert it because I recognize you as a serious editor who makes good contributions and because I don't have a problem with you doing it, but I felt that it bears mention that I don't feel that I'm bound by the fact that VPI's administration would prefer us to call it something else, that's all.

---1995hoo 18:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I realize that you used "rvv" in good faith ... I was just making the suggestion that it's inappropriate except in the case of "simple" vandalism, eg, adding "BOBBY IS A MORON" or something. Any edit that might at all be reviewable should have an edit summary. As for VPI, Wikipedia generally refers to institutions, people, etc, by their own self-identified name. Tech has not self-identified as VPI in 35 years. You can't go into the store and buy a VPI hat. Nobody outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia would recognize the name VPI. I realize that on Sabre, it's common to refer to us by our old-school name, but Wikipedia isn't a message board. But regardless of that, anyone should be referred to by their self-identified name or the most commonly accepted name. --BigDT 18:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Pokemon etc.

I could not agree more with your comment about the trivial subjects that are vehemently included in Wikipedia. The question I ask myself if this is not due to a systemic error, maybe we should have debates for inclusion instead of debates for deletion like any other publication. At least that would discourage a big portion of the self-projectors Alf^Photoman 15:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Essjay's departure of Wikipedia

Hi BigDT, I am saddened to see one in a billion Wikipedians leave the project. I have came here to you, because I wanted to know if you, or another administrator could let him know by email, still at this point, that I wanted to award him the Tireless Contributor Barnstar for filling so many roles on Wikipedia.(administrator, Election Official, Bureaucrat, oversight, checkuser, and arbitrator). I did not modify his talk page. He seemed like one of the most dedicated wikipedians to the project, and that won't be forgotten by me.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 03:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

His talk page is only s-protected ... you should be able to modify it and leave the barnstar if you would like to. --BigDT 04:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you BigDT, it means a lot to me that I could do that. Now, it will remain a mystery wether he finds out about, because he might never look at his talk page again. Well, I believe he knows in spirit.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you go to your "my preferences" link and add your email address, to your preferences, then click "confirm my email" (or something like that - I forget exactly what the button says), then you will be able to send email to other Wikipedians. In the "toolbox" on the left side of your screen, there will be a link "E-mail this user" any time you are on another user's user page or talk page. You can use that link to send email to Essjay (or anyone else who has it setup for people to email them). Admins don't have access to anyone's email address - I can only email him exactly the same way that you can - use the "E-mail this user" link. --BigDT 04:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I actually thought at this point it might not be approprite to email him, but since you recommened it to me, I tried to, but he apparently didn't have an email. So, I disabled my email. Thank you for your efforts to help.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 05:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I shortly enabled my email, but then I disabled it. Meaning, I saved my preferences without the email, shortly after I saved my preferences with the email address.(And I also followed the confirmation code as well.) From this point, I won't receive any leginamate emails from Wikipeida, but a message on my talk page instead, right?--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Lucky for me that I left him the barnstar when I did. Now, his talk page is fully protected, but it was only semi-protected like you said recently before when I sent it.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 16:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you blank your email address in your preferences screen, you won't receive any emails from anyone. --BigDT 18:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you BigDT, and the way I look at it, Essjay's impact on Wikipedia, and his characteristics of being a frienldy and dedicated person are still with us, and therefore, he is still with us, I think. That's a conforting way to feel when someone leaves. Maybe the Wikipedia community can do something to do just to honor him, like have Marsh 4 be Essjay day. If the community is thinking of that, could you keep me posted?(I hope you don't think that's too mushy. The reason why I'm asking is that it seems like many Wikipedians and administrators as well are sad about his departure, like I am.)--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 00:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that because of the circumstances surrounding his departure, most people are willing to just let him go quietly and would just like to move on with life. --BigDT 01:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 01:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!

Kyle Eckel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Expand this area to see closed discussion

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page. Thanks for the work with the Kyle Eckel article. The reason I had put he was terminated from his service at the academy is because he was working for the Navy at a position at the Academy. But your working makes better sense I suppose. Thanks again, Metros232 05:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC) How's this for a source? http://www.navytimes.com/legacy/new/0-NAVYPAPER-2346524.php —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chrisjnelson (talk • contribs) 05:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC). the last message is not confirmation. The Navy Times is a privately distributed newspaper. The Navy has no affiliation with the newspaper other then the word Navy in the title. This paper covers the Navy due to their own decision. Again, the Navy is not responsible for anything published in the Navy Times. The United States Navy does not produce this paper. It is a private paper which covers the Navy. Much like how Sports Illustrated is not the official word for the NBA, NFL, MLB, etc Thank you "Navyfootball 05:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)" For the sake of not carrying on the discussion across four different pages, I suggest we move it to Talk:Kyle Eckel. I have added the three sources that we have there for discussion. --BigDT 05:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC) No problem. Thanks for the help and interest. "Navyfootball 06:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)" The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

John Funder (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Article has candidates for 3RR SatuSuro 22:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless I'm missing something, I only see three total edits in the last three days. --BigDT 22:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough I've only just noticed it, my problem - if youre watching thats fine, my mistake sorry to bother SatuSuro 22:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I started working with the issue in response to a page protection request. A user was requesting s-protection to stop IP vandalism. Well, as it turns out, the IP was correctly removing unsourced inflammatory content. I have tried to get both sides to talk. The material that is being added is now a toned down version that is sourced with a book. (Unfortunately, there is no web version of it.) It's obvious, though, that this is going nowhere ... I have opened a RFC on the issue. I would consider protecting the page ... but honestly, both the IP and the user are rather singular in their purpose and I think that protecting it would do nothing - the party whose version is protected just wouldn't participate, content to leave it like it is. --BigDT 22:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining - I realise I should have said edit war not 3rr - , I'm beginning to get too big a watch list and I'm finding items i have forgotten as to why theyre on! SatuSuro 22:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I have the same problem ... I've half thought about making "watch pages" (add a bunch of links to a page and then use "related changes") by topic areas. --BigDT 22:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that - the comment at Funder's art - - creeping closer to (ugh) 6,000 watch pages - I must be crazy :) SatuSuro 03:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Image uploader AIV

I saw this on AIV, but it doesn't look like vandalism, rather someone refusing to follow policy. Since you're an image expert, I thought you'd know what to do, see: "Skiddyjim (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) continues to upload images without source info and insert them into articles after over a month of warnings. CovenantD 12:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)", Rlevse 13:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone blocked him indef. Is that the right call?Rlevse 13:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Goodness ... take a look at his contributions. He left a lot of mess to clean up. He inserted a bunch of photos at the beginning of articles where it didn't make sense to add them. Going back over his last 20 or so edits, I don't see much that's useful - just a big mess to clean up. Indefinitely blocked doesn't necessarilly mean forever banned. If he is willing to stop and discuss what he is doing and address the problems with it, he can always be unblocked at some future time ... but as it is, I would consider this an emergency block. --BigDT 00:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

So uploading photos that don't add anything is blockable, that's what I want to know. It's sort of like making nonsense edits, I guess, as opposed to the type of vandalism where there's profanity and such.Rlevse 02:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Essentially, yes. It really depends on what they are uploading. If they are uploading useless images, but otherwise making good faith edits, I would discuss the issue with them, rather than blocking. Explain that Wikipedia is not free webhosting and they should upload the contents of their camera to flickr instead of Wikipedia. If someone is just uploading their porn collection, though, I would block on sight. In this case, the user was repeatedly uploading untagged images and adding them inline in articles where they didn't belong. Personally, I would have tried to have a conversation with the person rather than blocking ... and I'm not thrilled that the first action taken was a block ... but it's one of those things that I'm not going to jump up and down too loudly about. I would say that uploading unsourced photos is not the same as a nonsense edit because the photos were, unquestionably, uploaded in good faith ... probably this is a very young child who just doesn't know what they are doing ... but if they are going to ignore the warnings, something has to be done. --BigDT 03:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you now that you've explained it.Rlevse 03:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Scout gallery

How do we get this onto Wikia, then, brother? I don't want this lost. Chris 06:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Copy/paste ... unfortunately, there's no way to do it. Each image will need to be uploaded individually. I haven't yet created it, but I will create {{scoutlogo}} and {{scoutpatch}} that can be used to tag them as appropriate. --BigDT 12:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Your user page

Hello, I think you should pipelink your Sulu link to Hikaru Sulu. I tried doing it but your page is protected right? Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 13:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks ... I've fixed it and unprotected my page ... there had been incidents of vandalism, but there's no real need for full protection. --BigDT 01:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Groanio

Hey, just wanted a bit of advice on the above page, I fully protected it for trolling by the indef blocked user. I should have removed the trolling and but an indef block tag on, but was full protection OK? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The prohibition against editing protected pages (or editing pages just prior to protecting them) is because protection shouldn't be used to gain advantage in a content dispute. This wasn't a content dispute, though. Editing the page to remove personal attacks or to add appropriate user block templates is fine. Really, there's nothing useful there - the whole page could be blanked and replaced with {{Usertalk-vprotect}}. To answer your question, though, yes, full protection is fine, particularly in this case. This individual is a sock of a banned user who has created many sock puppets - there's nothing wrong with blocking them on sight. --BigDT 01:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for the reply, I guess its just best to check on my actions rather making mistakes. I've now replaced the page with {{Usertalk-vprotect}} per your advice - agree it's in order here. Hopefully that should be the end of the matter. I didn't realise the user was a sock, so thanks for adding that tag. Cheers for the advice Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

ScoutWiki Network

ScoutWiki

Hello BigDT,

As you had been talking about joining a common association for our scout wikis, Akela NDE has just written "statutes" (I don't know if this is the correct word in English, but I'm sure it isn't in Finnish... :p ) for this association. Please comme at http://forum.scoutwiki.org/viewtopic.php?id=56 to participate this debate over these statutes, with the hope "ScoutWiki Network" will soon become a real association...

Scout greetings from France,

benji 14:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I award you, BigDT, The Working Man's Barnstar for helping me tirelessly with my questions on Wikipedia. Thanks to you, ProveIt is an administrator and I'm adding links ten times as fast by figuring how to copy and paste as you mentioned. Congratulations!--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 01:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I didn't really have a good reason, other than my idea of using Werdnabot was a bad idea and I wanted to start over. Oh well, I should have blanked it. Sorry for wasting your time, Mr. DT. Bushcarrot (Talk·Guestbook) 16:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Tag

Thanks for removing the speedy delete tag I wrongly put on a user page (User:Xox-emily-xox). I will pay more attention next time! GDon4t0 (talk to me...) 17:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

College Basketball Project

Hi, I am interested in joining this project. I currently update the Women's Basketball Championship games (in progress). I was wondering if you accept NIT tournaments as well! Thanks. Real96 00:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

As in all things on Wikipedia, be bold and do it. ;) --BigDT 00:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

trolling

Hi BigDT, I wanted to know if it would be okay if I reverted a revision, if it hasn't already been, on Encyclopedist's user page? It appears to me to be trolling from this user, because the edit was made by a suspected sock of Encyclopedist, and I see the same word fascism on the page aswell.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No real reason to. If it was a personal attack ... ok ... but I don't see any real reason to make an issue of it. --BigDT 11:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Don Murphy

Mr. Murphy said some things about you on his message board if you want to check them out. Just thought you should know. You might also consider protecting the Don Murphy page as well. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)_{a portrait of a sad young adolescent}

I posted to the ANI thread on this matter (and am surprised more people did not do so). Please let me know if I can be helpful in any way regarding this matter. Newyorkbrad 22:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for support in my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the support, and am disappointed on being judged by what in most opinions seem to be the wrong things. Until next time, edit on! :) — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 03:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

fair use in portals

there is currently a proposed amendment to include fair use images in the portal space at Wikipedia:Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals2. I have decided to contact you because you expressed interest in this topic in the past. Please know that I am contacting all editors who partipated in discussions regarding this at WT:FUC. If you feel I contactd you in error, or just don't care :) please ignore me. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 03:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)