User talk:Ayla

Welcome to my talk page! Feel free to leave any comments, criticisms, opinions, suggestions, disagreements, or anything else you feel like saying. However, please be aware that I reserve the right to alter my talk page, in part or in whole, should the need arise. Usually this would be limited to the archiving of older discussions, the removal of disruptive content, and the reformatting of the page layout.

I prefer to avoid fragmented conversations. Typically, I will reply to postings at the place where I find them (be it this talk page, the article talk page, or the other editor's talk page). However, since the prevailing trend appears to favour replying on the target editor's talk page, I may sometimes take up this latter option.

Generally, I will watch talk pages to which I have posted for five days after my last contribution. (This excludes warnings posted on vandals' talk pages, which I do not watch.) If you wish to draw my attention to some activity on any page which lies outside this time frame, just drop me a note by creating a new section below. If you revere concision, a link to the page accompanied by an explanatory sentence would suffice.

Finally, please do not forget to sign your posts. Happy editing!

Archives: 2007, 2008

Discussions

Template:Project Chanology protests, February 10 2008 updates/new sourcing

• Sherman, Jerome L. (February 11, 2008). "Masked protesters target Scientology's 'tactics': 40 to 50 join global action, gather outside South Side office". Pittsburgh Post Gazette. PG Publishing Co., Inc. Retrieved 2008-02-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
• Black, Tim (February 11, 2008). "Who's afraid of the Church of Scientology?: It's Sunday morning, and 300 young people in Guy Fawkes masks have gathered in central London to protest against a 'creepy cult'. What's going on?". Spiked Online. spiked. Retrieved 2008-02-25. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

Full cites for both of these are already in the article itself, so you'd have to do some moving around of cites between article/template to add these 2 stats to the template. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Another of the sources you added today was also helpful for the Anonymous article on grounds of its Facebook mention. Ayla (talk) 22:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. If you're reading here: How about distributing the references amongst city names when these are given sequentially? For example, "Cities with turnouts of one hundred or more protesters included Adelaide, Melbourne, and Sydney, Australia; Toronto, Canada; London, England; Dublin, Ireland; Austin, Texas, Dallas, Texas, Boston, Massachusetts, Clearwater, Florida, and New York City, New York, United States.^{[58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68]}" becomes "Cities with turnouts of one hundred or more protesters included Adelaide,^[58] Melbourne,^[59] and Sydney,^[60] Australia; Toronto,^[61] Canada; London,^[62] England; [...]". Or do you think that would be superfluous? Ayla (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If you want to do that, go for it, I just am lazy at the moment. Cirt (talk) 23:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll leave it for tomorrow or Wed though. Ayla (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

No need to say "from partyvan" in the edit summaries when adding new sources. If the sources are secondary sources that satisfy WP:V and WP:RS, just the source/cite info itself will be sufficient. Cirt (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I use it to keep track of where the source was originally mentioned. It tends to be useful in cases where the source is a newscast with a YouTube link which could not be included in the citation. Do you think editors might have a problem with the partyvan site? I could copy the link/mention to the template talk page instead. Ayla (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Eh, either way, not really that anyone would have a problem w/ it, more that it's not necesary, but yea, the talk page idea would be better. Cirt (talk) 23:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the suggestion :-) Ayla (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

hey

WP:ANI: the bottom (well it might have moved up slightly now) thread is about me. They are saying I have been doing something wrong. Can you please go help prove that my contributions have been good? Thank you... Crystalclearchanges (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Your intentions might have been good, but you still remain a banned user. If you wanted to make an unnoticed comeback, you should have picked a different topic area for editing. I filed the checkuser with a fleeting hope of proving you innocent, but ended up convincing myself that you are not. Ayla (talk) 01:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Info

Hello Ayla. You should know that Crystalclearchanges claims, in his user page, that you are one of three editors he "is close to". Cheers! The Ogre (talk) 23:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So are you :-p I'm not acquainted with the Iamandrewrice case, so I'm not taking any assumptions on this one. I filed the checkuser report in order to settle the suspicions one way or the other, given that the user has expressed himself/herself willing. Ayla (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, so am I :)! And I've asked him to remove me from that list. This user is highly suspect and this list seems like a strategy to demonstrate supposed support. I just thought you should know. See you around! The Ogre (talk) 23:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems more than suspicious now. I've presented my evidence at the RFCU, the case should be closed soon. Cheers! Ayla (talk) 01:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Brian Reddyb Coups

There are so many. The question is, however, how many can you find? Please note many of these coups were orchastrated by derivations of Brian Reddyb...makes them that bit harder to find and all the more interesting. Regards, QuintessentialReddy (talk) 10:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

So. As per what QuintessentialReddy has just said. How many have you found? Not quite as easy as the Rednex episode was, is it? Regards, REDeeBee (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on successfully finding reference to Briyan al-Reddyib's bloodless coup in Libya. That was quite a find; no doubt you just googled 'Briyan' 'wiki' 'coup', and Bob's your uncle as they say. However, you failed to uncover a number of other coups. These coups were also orchestrated by people who are named with deviations of Brian Reddyb. Unfortunately for you, these entries were made using completely new IP addresses. In addition the usernames used, while deviations of Brian Reddyb, are not necessarily so obvious and easy to find. I bid you good luck in your quest to find them. Regards, RespectableReddy (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

ReddyFreddy

Believe it or not. I do not know of this user. Could be an imitator or could just be an innocent new user. Checkuser wont work I'm afraid; as you can no doubt tell based on my last few edits. Trust me, I know not of this person. 134.48.216.40 (talk) 23:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Note to other editors: I appreciate your reversions of this user's posts on my talk page. However, given that they are not uncivil, offensive, or particularly disruptive, I do not think it worthwhile to revert war over them. But please do keep any used IPs on watch for mainspace edits. Thanks. Ayla (talk) 19:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ayla! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.

Finally, I'd like to appologise for any delay, and wish you luck with VandalProof! Ale_Jrb^talk 19:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Can continue where I left off on the RC patrol now. Ayla (talk) 19:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

RFC

Don't bother. I won't bother even replying to the RFC because anyone who's been on Wikipedia long enough knows I'm strongly opposed to the process' mob mentality. Will ^(talk) 23:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, the tag in userspace is intended to be used if they overturn, but adopt Jeske's proposal for relisting. Will ^(talk) 23:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

With the Anonymous article, the article creator is an editor who has stated that people like Phaedriel deserve their ED articles (I have chatlogs) - that, and the article didn't assert its notability. With Project Chanology, that was a good-faith delist because I felt it didn't meet the GA criteria. I shouldn't really be punished for my internet being slow. For ED - well, the article's been at DRV so many times that most review starters get it speedy closed and banned (and only Shii's reputation has saved him), and my responses have been rather restrained on the DRV. With the image, what you can do if you want the image kept is to find where the author of the image says to /b/ "okay, here's a logo/propoganda poster" (or a thread like that). But seriously, you're blowing this up way more than you need to. Will ^(talk) 23:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

More things to explain? In order: no consensus to delete doesn't mean keep. In fact, several articles have been nearly immediately merged due to patentyly failing content policy even though their AFDs ended "no consensus". Images are speedyable if they fail the NFCC, no matter how many DRVs or IFDs. I restored the speedy tag because I felt the closer hadn't applied 10a correctly, and it's stupid to have the clock reset for the same concern. Will ^(talk) 00:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, bringing the same evidence again and again (which Shii did - 80% of the sources have been used in previous DRVs) to an issue which has such a massive consensus on it is seen as disruptive. And with the image, NFCC states that an image needs "Attribution of the source of the material and, if different from the source, of the copyright holder." (emphasis mine) The point I'm trying to make is that 4chan don't own the copyright, Anonymous, as a group (or "cultural phenomenon") lacking any heirachy, can't hold copyrights. (but the CoS can as they have a business arm and actual heirachy) The copyright is held by the original poster of the image, and if you find that (the Project Chanology wiki might have the source), I'll be happy to have the image kept. Will ^(talk) 15:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, I actually do see your point and partially agree that I have been agressive with 4chan related articles, because of the (admittedly well-organised) trolling that comes from there, means you have to be on the lookout, lest we end up with another controversy. I'm just trying to make sure people don't use Wikipedia to overinundate itself with 4chan related material which wouldn't stand if it was, say, Bebo or Myspace related. (e.g. GameFAQs has one article, and us LUEsers used to be as bad as /b/tards) Will ^(talk) 16:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Noinclude?

I think it is time to wrap all the citations at {{Project Chanology protests, February 10 2008}} with <noinclude></noinclude>, and then to re-add the cites back into the main article, Project Chanology, separately. This way, the cites and references won't show up in the Project Chanology article itself, but just in the template, which would still satisfy WP:V but hopefully would speed up loading the main article. Also, readers could more easily differentiate between cites used to back up paragraph-text, and cites used in the template itself. Thoughts? Cirt (talk) 06:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You mean in order to reduce the number of references in the main article? Yes, fair enough. I can take care of the <noinclude></noinclude> modifications to the template myself (shouldn't be too hard using the AutoWikiBrowser). However, copying the appropriate citations to the article might be a little laborious; do you have any tools to facilitate the process? Some suggestions:

• Leave a note on the talk page of the article in case some editors wish to contest this change on grounds of WP:V.
• The link to the template should be made more prominent (specifically, within the table header, rather than footer).
• Any occurrences of N/A can also be wrapped in <noinclude></noinclude>.
• I would prefer to tweak the template in order to make the inclusion/omission of references specifiable through a parameter. The net result would be the same.

Ayla (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with all of your above points, I will leave a note on the article's talk page when I get a chance, or you could, of course. I don't really know of an easy way to add the appropriate citations back into the article, but I don't think that there are that many, maybe 5 or so that are in both. Cirt (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• I think it's closer to 20. Don't forget the "turnouts of one hundred or more protesters" and "wore Guy Fawkes masks" city-by-city lists. Ayla (talk) 21:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• Oh, you're right, I had forgotten about that, crap. Well, it still shouldn't take too long - so long as the names for the refs are the same, shouldn't be too hard to copy and paste. Cirt (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• All done, except for the parameter-based part, which was becoming too bulky. Ayla (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, looks great. The only thing left is to collapse the cite templates in both places, to take up less space. Cirt (talk) 23:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I personally prefer it being non-collapsed within the template page. People visiting the template would most probably have done so in order to see the table, since it is the primary content of the page. Ayla (talk) 23:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, no you misunderstand, I mean collapse the citation templates, not the template itself. When unnecessary spacing is removed from the citation templates used inside the references, it cuts down on the size of the page/article. Cirt (talk) 04:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You're referring to the newlines separating the parameters? Keep in mind that the newlines have no effect on the layout as spaces and newlines are stripped from the start and end of parameter values of named parameters. Thus, the rendered HTML would still be the same. Removing newlines would reduce the page size in terms of server storage, but then WP:PERF advises not to worry about server performance. The way I see it, the vertical vs. horizontal layout of citation templates is mostly an editorial decision (also discussed at Wikipedia:Don't use line breaks). I have no objection to converting the Project Chanology citations to horizontal format (although I haven't found how to AWB-automate it yet). However, if page size is the only issue, I would prefer keeping the template's citations as vertical, since it makes the markup more easily legible (at least for me). Ayla (talk) 12:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me, I was really only talking about for the article actually, not so much the template. Cirt (talk) 12:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to figure out the regex for automating it later; if not, we could just do it manually. Ayla (talk) 12:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Or would you rather we removed the newlines altogether? I've left a newline at the very start and very end of the citation templates (i.e. just after the <ref> and before the </ref>). Ayla (talk) 21:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Really they could just be removed altogether, that's what I do on other articles. Cirt (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, all done. Starting to get the hang of AWB now :-) Ayla (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Cirt (talk) 23:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Project Chanology protests, March 15, 2008

FYI. Cirt (talk) 09:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, if you can get a chance, it would be helpful to add these same secondary sources as they appear to the "Sources" section, at n:Wikinews international report: "Anonymous" celebrates L. Ron Hubbard's birthday#Sources. Cirt (talk) 09:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Do you think we should transclude the template into the article from now? Since it will be fully sourced, I think we could. Ayla (talk) 11:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I would wait. My inclination would be to work on it a bit, and add it in perhaps by the end of the day, if a multitude of secondary sources come out. As far at the article itself, I have been steadily compiling new sources to incorporate, and listing them on the article's talk page, but just haven't sat down and added stuff in paragraph form to the article yet, but I will at some point soon. Cirt (talk) 11:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to point out style considerations in the placement of the template. Because it takes up the entire width of the article, it needs to be placed in a position that's not near images and can fully take up that space without creating gaps in the text. Also, I am of the opinion that it should be placed at the end where it doesn't look out-of-place sandwiched between two sections of text. However, if you can provide a convincing reason and example where it is better in such a position, I'd be happy to concede the point. Maratanos (talk) 20:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Logical flow of text content. The last two paragraphs talk about events which happened after the February 10 protests. However, that section has been worked upon mostly by Cirt, so I'll leave it up to him to decide whether the new layout is acceptable. Also, from your alterations I'm assuming you're on widescreen; keep in mind that most people still use 1024x768. Any width for the template below 90% results in split rows. Ayla (talk) 21:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)