[edit] Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of William Sledd
An editor has asked for a deletion review of William_Sledd. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Reboot 18:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
The article Barbie had been semi-protected for quite a while, but the reason was that there is a long term problem with children and IP vandals adding nonsense to the article. See [1] for what happened within twenty minutes of unprotecting the article. To keep the article sensible and ready to read at any time, semi-protection has become near essential for this article.--Ianmacm 15:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- I thought I might have to watch the article but had no idea it would be swarmed that quickly. I've replaced the protection. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Incidentally, today is Barbie's official "birthday", as she was launched on March 9, 1959. At that time few people would have known that vandalizing her Wikipedia article would become a full time hobby for some people.--Ianmacm 15:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Which raises the question of what they do when the article's semi-protected. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wondering wandering
Clicking around in WP-land I struck upon a strange WWII-related word in the first line of the ko: pages[2].--Antiphus 06:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Babelfishing and following the links leads to me believe that 사용자:WaffenSS, a user, is running for adminship. ko:위키백과:관리자 선거 interwikis to our WP:RFA. Why it's at the top of every page, I'm not sure, I guess admins are a bigger deal on smaller Wikipedias, although Korean is far from insignificant with 25k+ articles.
- Anyway, I'm going over there to vote oppose. No idea whether it will be counted or not, but no Wikimedia project should be electing someone with a name related to the Nazis. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: User:Mike Dillon/Lothlorien Hall
Thanks for following up about this page. You're right that I have not yet done anything with this page, but another user (User:Argyriou) recently expressed interest in incorporating some of its content into the parent organization's article (University Students' Cooperative Association). Please be patient; I am aware that Wikipedia is not a free web host and I could host this page myself if that was my intention. Mike Dillon 14:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI, I left a note for Argyriou to see if he still intends to use the restored Lothlorien content. If he's no longer using it, I'll get back to you about deleting the page. Mike Dillon 14:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Look like he is done with it. Go ahead and delete. Thanks again for restoring it in the first place. Mike Dillon 18:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. --Sam Blanning(talk) 18:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Concerning your Admin Coaching assignments
Your name is still listed at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Volunteers. The department is heavily backlogged with student's requests for coaches, and we need your help!
Note that the instructions may have changed since the last time you checked, and the department now follows a self-help process...
If you don't currently have a student, or if you believe you can handle another one, please select a student from the request list at Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Requests and contact them. See the instructions on Wikipedia:Admin coaching. Good luck.
If you are no longer available to coach, , please remove yourself from the volunteers list.
Thank you.
The Transhumanist 03:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Grammar
Hi Samuel, If you have time, could you please check and maybe even correct the grammar of the article about Leo Fuld that I've translated?--Antiphus 12:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- I gave it a quick copyedit to remove some of the hangovers from the original Dutch (I assume), although I probably missed a few things. --Sam Blanning(talk) 20:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you and yes, the original is Dutch. --Antiphus 11:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jeffree Star Notability
First of all - I dont care about this guy, im not a fan or anything. He has a music album out, songs downloadable on iTunes, he made a guest appearance on ANTM (America's Next Top Model). At one point he did Paris Hilton's makeup... This isn't Notability vs Popularity IMO. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Species2112 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC).
- WP:DRV is the place to raise any new evidence of notability, but we rely on non-trivial coverage by reliable sources, i.e. publications like newspapers as opposed to blogs and Myspace, not subjective judgements about what the subject's done recently. If any of the above makes him notable then people will have been writing articles about him in significant publications that focus on him as the subject. --Sam Blanning(talk) 20:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Just unblock damn 202.76.162.34 now! I need that address to be unblocked! After all, I need to make some edits at school! And I don't want to use an account! 124.180.66.13 06:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Eh... are you sure this is CSD A7? It's not a product, nor are products covered by A7 anyway. I'm pretty sure this was a moderately well-known software package back in the day, and was somewhat relevant back in the day when people still used Napster-like P2P protocols. That said, I'm not sure if it's a relevant or remarkable software package now and I don't want to debate on whether or not it has any historic merit (because I'm too lazy to check, basically, I'm not sure if their work was really groundbreaking or anything); all I'm saying I been on cranky enough mood to delete this, I guess I would have shoved this through AfD just in case. =)
(And why is this article relevant to me? I'm doing an university course and this exercise somehow talks about Napster protocol, so I obviously wanted to see how this old project I heard about ages ago is doing right now to get some idea of how Napster protocol worked. [3] Yes, apparently it has a very very very tiny bit of academic worth =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Articles-7 applies to companies, organisations and web content, and it's common sense to extend Articles-7 to anything directly subordinate to the subject, such as albums or, indeed, software products (or any other kind of product). Or to put it another way, to say that an article doesn't fall under Articles-7 because the first line of the article is "Widget2.0 is a program produced by GenericSoft" instead of "GenericSoft is a software company which produces Widget2.0" makes no sense. If it's notable software, anyone can create a sourced article in its place. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] B.R.I.T.T.A.N.I.C.A.
Is there a way to undelete Wikipedia:B.R.I.T.T.A.N.I.C.A.? Here is my reasoning.
1. If you delete that article, you must also delete this one: Wikipedia:Primogeniture, which was the basis of the B.R.I.T.T.A.N.I.C.A. article.
2. B.R.I.T.T.A.N.I.C.A. is not a wikipedia competitor, it is an evil organization.
3. The encyclopedia Britanica is spelled with only one letter "t", while B.R.I.T.T.A.N.I.C.A. is not a word at all, but an acronym consisting of several words.
4. The article was clearly marked as humor.
5. There is no Cabal.
Sue Rangell[citation needed] 18:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
- If you feel like making some sensible arguments, please feel free to make another post. This post, in particular point 3, does not merit a reply. --Sam Blanning(talk) 18:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to you, everyone hates me! So please unblock 202.76.162.34 now!
Just a heads-up that I made a small change in the {{DRV top}} (or {{drt}}) template: the level 4 header, with a (closed) marker, is now part of the template. So any discussion can now be closed by simply replacing the four equal signs on each side of the title into the the template text:
====[[Title]]====
is changed to
{{subst:drt|[[Title]]|Decision}}
which turns into
Hope that makes closures a bit easier. Comments and questions please here. Take care, trialsanderrors 08:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deleted Article
Deletion review Deletion review is for reviewing the deletion of entire articles. Removal of text should be discussed on the relevant talk page, in this case Talk:Dust. In the case you are referring to the text you added was copyrighted, and had to be removed. As it says on every edit page, contributions must be licensed under the GFDL and not violate anyone's copyright. You are welcome to add text to any article in your own words as long as you cite your sources. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Sam,
I am a little confused. The item I entered was jointly written by myself and my fellow director, Nick Vousden-White, so how can my inclusion of it on the Wickipedia pages be an infringement of copyright? It was Nick who submitted the text to the NCCA magazine (without transfer of copyright) and it was I who published it at http://www.worldofclean.co.uk/index.php?show_aux_page=6 a site owned by my company (Solution UK Ltd.) Regards, John E Bolton MBICSc.
- If you own the copyright then you can send an email confirming that you agree to release the content under the GFDL to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org, which will allow us to use it. Please be aware that the GFDL means more than allowing Wikipedia to use it - material released under the GFDL may be edited and reproduced anywhere under the conditions of the GFDL, including at our numerous mirrors and forks, and cannot be restricted to non-commercial purposes. --Sam Blanning(talk) 18:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Obama's mother
Hi - actually, her first name, believe it or not, really was Stanley - she was named after her father, Stanley Dunham, who allegedly did so because he really wanted a son. There are a lot of google hits on Shirley, but from what I've been able to determine from multiple sources, her name was Stanley. Just one more unusual detail in an unusual bio. I just wanted to let you know why I changed it back - that it's not vandalism or a joke. I added a ref and an explanation to the article, which I hope will suffice. Cheers Tvoz | talk 06:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. As you can probably guess, I did see the use of Stanley somewhere but assumed it was a typo after a Google search. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] MyWikiBiz
Considering that user was unblocked by Jimbo himself just a few days ago, don't you think you should get permission from him before reblocking? What "legal intimidation" are you referring to, anyway? I haven't seen any from him. Everyking 08:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- If I was reblocking him because I disagreed with the unblock in the first place, that would be true (and I would be wheel warring), but I was blocking on the basis of behaviour (documented at WP:ANI) which occurred after the unblock - more to the point, an unblock of a second indefinite block, under which circumstances the user is clearly on very thin ice. I notified Jimbo on his talk page, but as I said there, I'm sure he wouldn't want us to be paralysed with fear and unable to stop further incivil behaviour from someone in the last chance saloon just because it was his name in the block log. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- What behavior are you referring to, though? I have been following at least some of the discussion he's been involved in and haven't seen him doing anything wrong. Everyking 22:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- See the ANI thread. --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- The thread, which I read before I even posted to your talk, is on AN, and none of the four links listed by Durova give any apparent support to your claim that he made legal threats; in fact, in two of the links he explicitly denies making legal threats. Possibly you are alleging subtle insinations in specific parts of the comments and I didn't detect them; if that's the case, could you give me specific quotes of the alleged threats? Everyking 00:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- And, um, sorry if I'm misinterpreting this, but were you poking fun at the murder of Bob Woolmer in that same thread? Everyking 00:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's the sort of nudge nudge, wink wink, I'm-saying-the-exact-opposite-of-what-I-actually-mean stuff that people who've been given a second (actually third) chance after being indefinitely blocked (twice) tend to use because they think we're all total morons who either won't see through it or will be too afraid to call them on it, and it's exactly the sort of thing that will not be tolerated from such users. And yes, you're misinterpreting. Sorry I sent you to the wrong board, though. --Sam Blanning(talk) 11:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Incidentally, Kohs made his implicit threats explicit to me via email. You can ignore that if you want, since I can't prove it, but you should know that you won't be able to change my mind about what he meant when he already made it clear what he meant himself. --Sam Blanning(talk) 11:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- You can believe what you want based on whatever communications you've had, but if the evidence doesn't exist on-wiki then you shouldn't have blocked. You acknowledge that he was denying it in the very posts you claim are evidence that he was doing it—isn't that a weird contradiction? Logically, why would a person even want to do that? If he wanted to make a legal threat, then doesn't simultaneously denying it defeat the purpose of it? And again, if legal threats do exist in those links in some form, please specifically quote them. It's exasperating to have someone post links they claim say one thing, then to look at them and see they appear to say something completely different, and not receive any clarification about how the original interpretation was reached. As for the Woolmer issue, it certainly looked like you were poking fun at it; if my interpretation of that was wrong, could you explain what you intended by it? Everyking 03:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think the further evidence posted by others on the WP:AN thread have removed all doubt. If you want the block overturned, you need to post there and convince them that "You children are among the most paranoid, spineless people I have ever encountered" and "Get back to your Dungeons & Dragons game" are typical of productive contributors, and that someone who says things like "I'm sure their lawyers would love to hear them described as trivial" would never dream of engaging in legal intimidation. Those are specific quotes. --Sam Blanning(talk) 11:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- He already was a productive contributor, although his productive work was promptly reverted and deleted after the ban (although he did not make those edits as a banned user), so I don't feel I should need to argue that. Productive contributors get angry sometimes and say unpleasant things. Anyway, all that is irrelevant to the reason he was banned, which was legal intimidation. The third quote you provide could back up that claim if made in a certain context, but I'm not having any luck finding the edit, so I can't see the context of it. Was this from the e-mail he sent you? And I suppose you are not going to explain the Woolmer comment. Everyking 15:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not going to spend any more time on this conversation, I've already explained myself adequately. I understand that you can't post on AN, something I'd initially forgotten about, but I understand you can still use RFC if you're that desperate for Kohs to have the run of the place. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- You have not adequately explained the ban, which is something you have a responsibility to do. Can you point me to the edit in which he made the quote above, or tell me if it was made by e-mail? Everyking 19:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have a greater responsibility to my head not to bang it against a brick wall. --Sam Blanning(talk) 21:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unblock
Could you please just unblock 202.76.162.34 now? Not only did you have to scare me even more by doing it on a 13th, but the block will end after the year 12's at my school leave! I want the block to end before they leave!
Could you please just do it!? Jc iindyysgvxc 07:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for the revert. Peace.--Striver - talk 13:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Visions Fantastic
Look at my page. Coastergeekperson04 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
