Jump to content

User talk:Thibbs: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Thibbs (talk | contribs)
28,090 edits
→EBSCO resources: new section
Line 179: Line 179:


I suggest a better forum for this would be [[WT:POLAND]]. But it says roughly: NOTICE: Editors are not anoymous, but sigh with full name only in paid materials, therefore their identity has to be confirmed through manual search. In rating the service (website), you should take into consideration only the rating in the reviews, not combined." (The last sentence s not clear to me, even in Polish, perhaps missing some context here). Cheers, --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 16:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I suggest a better forum for this would be [[WT:POLAND]]. But it says roughly: NOTICE: Editors are not anoymous, but sigh with full name only in paid materials, therefore their identity has to be confirmed through manual search. In rating the service (website), you should take into consideration only the rating in the reviews, not combined." (The last sentence s not clear to me, even in Polish, perhaps missing some context here). Cheers, --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</font>]]</sub> 16:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

== EBSCO resources ==

Dear Thibbs, some months ago I applied for an EBSCO account through TWL; since I got my account unfortunately I haven't managed to exploit it: before applying I had read that several journals on Classical studies (my main interest on Wikipedia) were included in the EBSCO subscription, but then I found out that they are just indexed and no full text is provided (other resources have full text of course, but so far I found none interesting to me). I hope I will be able to make a better use of my EBSCO account in the next months, but I just wanted to let you know that I can give up on my account in case there is shortage of EBSCO accounts for other applicants. Best regards, [[User:Continua_Evoluzione|<span style="color:#00008b">'''Continua'''</span>]][[User_talk:Continua_Evoluzione|<span style="color:#6495ed">'''''Evoluzione'''''</span>]] 09:45, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:45, 23 January 2016

HELLO - This is the talk page for Thibbs. Please place messages to me at the bottom of my talk page and I will reply as soon as I find the free time. All comments and criticisms are welcome. Normally I will leave my reply here on this page. Thank you.

A barnstar for you!

The Press Barnstar
For the incredibly interesting article you wrote on Gamergate for the WP:VG newsletter. Brustopher (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I appreciate it. I only wish I'd had a bit more time to edit and process it. I'd originally intended a longer article and I feel this one comes off as a little disjointed. Anyway I'm pleased if people found it interesting. It's a topic that the WP:VG Newsletter really couldn't just ignore forever, and a large debt of gratitude is owed to the interviewees who agreed to speak with me. -Thibbs (talk) 10:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're really good with the interviews. I hope you'll do more pieces like this in the future, perhaps working the interview itself as the story? czar 15:07, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hah, I'm glad you think so, Czar, because you're up for interview next quarter! -Thibbs (talk) 22:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Make it a feature about the mean, mean deletionists! ;) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:05, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Not a bad idea. I could see a Newsletter piece on the effects of deletionism on editor retention and how best to foster a nurturing environment for new editors. But I am probably going to sit out a quarter or two. I've written 3 of the last 4 newsletter features and if I'm not careful the readership will soon tire of my droning voice. -Thibbs (talk) 23:21, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          ... I think he was joking. And for what it's worth, I can't picture how the newsletter would tire of hearing an original report from you each quarter, but that's your call. czar 15:58, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          Yeah I figured that, but it's still not a bad idea. If you grow out a proper mustachio in the next few months and learn to twirl it then you could play the part of the villain. -Thibbs (talk) 01:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO application?

Hi Thibbs, just curious - has my EBSCO application been declined? I haven't heard back from any Library admin, so just wanted to confirm present status. Thanks --Peripatetic (talk) 12:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Peripatetic: Sorry for the slow progress. You applied several weeks ago and your patience is greatly appreciated. This is a new partnership for TWL and the behind-the-scenes set-up process is taking a little longer than anticipated. Your request has not been denied and I will be working through and processing more accounts today. Please hang in there. -Thibbs (talk) 13:21, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editing from a previously blocked IP address

Hello, Thibbs. You pinged me and Gial Ackbar at User talk:76.188.18.166. For what it's worth, here are my observations. The IP address 76.188.18.166 was used in the past by the blocked editor Johnwest1999. Blocks on both that IP address and the account were evaded by using the IP address 65.182.126.23, which has now been blocked for a year by Gilliam, and 76.188.18.166 is back in use. There have been only three edits from 76.188.18.166 since its latest block ended, which does not provide much evidence, but there is just about enough similarity to previous edits to encourage me to think the IP address may well be being used by Johnwest1999 again, but not enough for me to take any action. I think for the moment just watching editing from 76.188.18.166 is the thing to do. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Game Zero

Thanks for the tip on Wikipedia:WikiProject Websites/Early web history task force. I have not run across that group before so I'll definitely take a look. I really appreciate you keeping this issue in mind and frankly I was quite surprised to see your message. Thanks again. Cheers! BcRIPster (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and just as a side note while I'm here. I've started a process of scanning all of the press materials the magazine received between 1992-1998. I have several thousand pages of documents and part of getting them scanned in, I'm working out a home for them to live online (it may go under the GZ domain, but still undecided). Lot's of really cool stuff in here that I think people would enjoy seeing. I've also been slowly digging up old tapes and putting stuff on YouTube which includes the video footage of XBand announcing their partnership with Game Zero (at 1:14 Genesis video and 1:44 SNES video). BcRIPster (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more video links for you. I found a tape we shot at Shoshinkai 1995 and pulled off footage of the late Nintendo President Hiroshi Yamauchi as well as beta gameplay of the Mario 64... I also put up some beta gameplay of a previously unseen build of Resident Evil. I have such a stack of video to sort out. Good grief... BcRIPster (talk) 08:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like my edits being reverted

Hi Thibbs

I don't like my edits being reverted at Wikipedia. I know I have been blocked by sockpuppetry for many years now, I want to return to Wikipedia and keep electronic game articles updated. I hope I will be globally unblocked soon.--86.174.144.251 (talk) 11:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed: Electronic Gaming Monthly Issue 233

Hey there, Thibbs. I'm preparing some rewrites for Tales of Vesperia in my sandbox, and I've got a review from the issue above as part of the reception section. As I've heard that you have a copy of this issue, can you help me with this? --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:09, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've found a safe pdf of the issue online, so problem solved. Sorry for any trouble. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO

I have yet to receive anything about EBSCO. Has there been an issue? Nick2crosby (talk) 01:14, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick2crosby: Yeah, I sent you an email on October 25th so if you haven't received it by now then there's probably a problem. I assume you've checked your email since then, but perhaps the email address you set up with Wikipedia is different from the one you normally use. Can you verify that the email you are checking is the same as the one you've associated with Wikipedia? You can see which email address you gave to Wikipedia under "email options" at the bottom of Special:Preferences. -Thibbs (talk) 01:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Thibbs: I did check with the registered Wikipedia e-mail. It didn't appear in my inbox on here or my e-mail. Nick2crosby (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Nick2crosby: OK, I've sent you another email just now. Please check your spam folder too. -Thibbs (talk) 01:43, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Thibbs: I received it. Thanks. Nick2crosby (talk) 02:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No e-mail received

Hello, Thibbs: I did not et the EBSCO-related e-mail last month. Kdammers (talk) 01:36, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO email Reply

Hello Thibbs,

No I cannot see an email from or about EBSCO. I have recently changed my email, but have updated it for Wikipedia contact. Please send the email again. I would certainly like to have access to EBSCO.

James sinarau (talk) 05:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed at DRN

You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, TransporterMan (talk · contribs) (Current DRN coordinator) This is an informational posting only and I am not watching this page; contact me on my user talk page if you wish to communicate with me about this. via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am hesitant to start anything major just at present due to an elevated IRL workload... I have been meaning to get back to DRN, though. I'll make a point of taking on a few (not simultaneously of course) when things calm down a bit. -Thibbs (talk) 01:26, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

I not sure how you feel justified in calling other editors "deeply troubled" or a "fool", while at the same time complaining of their behaviour. but I will ask that you remove those attacks. Thank you. - theWOLFchild 15:47, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "deeply troubled" comment was inadvisable. However the second part, in context, was "... make the perpetrator look like a fool ..." which was not actually calling you a fool. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:12, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Easy for you say... you're not on the receiving end of the comment, whereas I clearly am. I think his message can just as easily be conveyed without that remark, hence my request for it to be removed still stands. - theWOLFchild 21:13, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Thewolfchild: Yes, I had a change of heart shortly after posting the comment you've linked. I really didn't think it fair to paint you and the other editor with whom you were bickering with the same brush. You're both individuals and your edit histories deserve individual scrutiny. I think you will be pleased to learn that I have already refactored that comment several days ago. I don't think I'll remove my comment that "Severely anti-collegial behavior doesn't only make the perpetrator look like a fool, it drives away good editors", however, because it's a general statement with general applicability (as true for you as it is for the other editor, for me, or for anyone else). It's not uncommon for very angry and aggressive editors to act in such a way that they appear childish or foolish. That in itself is not a problem. It only becomes a problem when the editor is unable to learn from the feedback he is receiving. -Thibbs (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you still felt at one point that it was acceptable to refer to other editors as "deeply troubled". Now you claim you changed it because "the editors in question have different contribution histories"...? Not because it could be (and should've been) considered an attack? Whatever.
You certainly could use your "fool" statement in a "general" sense in other venues, but in this case it is specifically being applied to me. You claim to not see that, but it's also evident you don't give a crap about how your comments impact your fellow editors - one of the very things you seem to enjoy preaching about. But, whatever... change it or don't change it. You don't care. None of the dozen or so admins there care. And now, neither do I. Like I said, this whole experience has been 'enlightening'. I am now done with this matter. - theWOLFchild 22:21, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand that you are upset and now that I see that Cassianto has in fact retired I can see why you might think that my comment was specifically being applied to you. I do give you my word that I was unaware of Cassianto's retirement at the time I posted my comment, though. My concerns that aggression would drive others away was made with more of a mind toward new editors who might encounter that sort of thing. I will try to make a note of this at the AN thread later tonight after I get home from work. -Thibbs (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO

Hello! I have recently answered your message about access to the Ebsco database. Looking forward for your reply.--Alexander Tendler (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO

Just like the message before this one, I'm following up on EBSCO access - you asked me to ping you when I reached 500 edits, I'm not at 532. Thanks for your consideration! Owlsmcgee (talk) 02:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Here's to another year of the Newsletter, Thibbs. GamerPro64 03:11, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WPVG CSE clutter fixes

Wanted to toss these to you for discussion

  • http://www.gamasutra.com/view/pressreleases/ and http://www.mcvuk.com/press-releases/– maybe remove these from the main RS search and move them to the situational search? because they're only good as self-published sources (haven't been fact-checked by Gamasutra)
  • http://www.gamerevolution.com/game/ – these are always listings with no helpful info, but what are we even using from this site? /features/? /faq/? I'd also remove /screen/ [1] and /video/
  • www.metacritic.com/game/.../user-reviews and /trailers and /details – we don't use comments from the first, the second isn't helpful to have as a link, and the third consists of "credits provided by GameFAQs"; in fact, I'd even reduce Metacritic to only search for the /critic-reviews page, if possible, because that cuts out the stuff we don't use altogether (note: though I suppose we use original articles and rankings by Metacritic too, however sparingly)
  • Who supplies the info behind http://www.gry-online.pl/S016.asp?ID=29033 and http://www.gry-online.pl/encyklopedia-gier.asp?TEM=261&CZA=3 listings?
  • Listings like http://www.gry-online.pl/gra-ocena.asp?ID=17477 and http://www.gamershell.com/pc/flying_tigers_shadows_over_china/downloads.html tend to clutter the search results too

czar 19:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks, Czar. I'll attend to this soonish and I'll make a note here when it's done. Please remind me if it's not done within 7 days. Regarding gry-online.pl, by the way, pl.wiki (whose vetting we relied on in determining reliability) have a note for this source related to the authorship of the articles. The note is this: "UWAGA: Redaktorzy nie są anonimowi, ale podpisują się imieniem i nazwiskiem wyłącznie w materiałach płatnych, stąd też ich tożsamość musi być sprawdzona poprzez ręczne wyszukiwanie. Przy wpisywaniu ocen serwisu należy brać pod uwagę jedynie ocenę wystawioną w recenzji, nie zaś kombinowaną." I'll reach out to some of the Polish editors here for a quick translation. -Thibbs (talk) 21:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Updated in the checklist. I think we'll need individual revisits of the situational sources, but that's towards the bottom of my list. At the top, I'll have the interview finished later today, hopefully with a little spare time for revisions czar 10:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just fixed bullet point #1, but I'm not 100% satisfied with it yet. The Gamasutra press releases are now nicely absent from the RS search and present in the SRS search, but the mcvuk press releases seems to be mostly absent from both CSEs. Sometimes there is a little lag in the system so hopefully this just resolves itself... I'll get to the last two points (gamerevolution and metacritic) later today if I can. -Thibbs (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK all done... I think. Let me know if problems persist. -Thibbs (talk) 20:23, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's our opinion on tag listings on websites, that is, a list of article blurbs tagged with some relevant term. In my particular search example, I searched for "Aardwolf mud" at [4] and the first page is entirely engadget's tag lists pointing to the same article as the first hit. While a tag page does provide an overview, all the hits are still in the main results sorted by Google's relevance criteria. The issue here is that a lot of tag lists end up as irrelevant hits and tend to clutter the already-short results page. If "Starcraft" appears under "Blizzard", "RPG", "Zerg", "Chris Metzen", "Templar", etc., then all those tag pages get returned even if most of the articles listed are not relevant or even the same ones. I don't think any real hits will be lost if we exclude tag pages and let google show the direct pages. The only way a page would be excluded is if it's tagged under something that the article does not mention (but then how is it relevant to RS search anyway). I'm wondering what yours and Czar's opinion on this is as you've dealt with exclusions? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:55, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm of mixed minds. I like the tag pages when they collect more than one article—makes it really easy to see the range of what each publication is covering. There is also something to say for an outlet choosing to make a tag (planning to cover future articles in that topic). It does add some clutter, though, and I imagine it's worse with the broader topics. I slightly lean towards keeping them but I don't feel strongly about it. Another idea could be to have a CSE for just the tags, when needed. czar 07:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'll hold off for now then. I don't know how much use a tags-only CSE would get, but we could might ask the broader community for input. If there's interest then I could get that set up. -Thibbs (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to look at which sites have exclusions, so I organized them in a table: User:Hellknowz/Sandbox3. While doing so, 3 exclusions seem to not belong to anything that I can identify: http://free4web.pl/3/*, http://forum.idg.pl/, http://forums.sports-gaming.com/. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:51, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Thibbs!

Happy New Year!

Thibbs,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz Read! Talk! 20:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

re:Translation request: 2 sentences

I suggest a better forum for this would be WT:POLAND. But it says roughly: NOTICE: Editors are not anoymous, but sigh with full name only in paid materials, therefore their identity has to be confirmed through manual search. In rating the service (website), you should take into consideration only the rating in the reviews, not combined." (The last sentence s not clear to me, even in Polish, perhaps missing some context here). Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EBSCO resources

Dear Thibbs, some months ago I applied for an EBSCO account through TWL; since I got my account unfortunately I haven't managed to exploit it: before applying I had read that several journals on Classical studies (my main interest on Wikipedia) were included in the EBSCO subscription, but then I found out that they are just indexed and no full text is provided (other resources have full text of course, but so far I found none interesting to me). I hope I will be able to make a better use of my EBSCO account in the next months, but I just wanted to let you know that I can give up on my account in case there is shortage of EBSCO accounts for other applicants. Best regards, ContinuaEvoluzione 09:45, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thibbs&oldid=701237471"