User talk:Splash/Archive14

I'm away for some time.

Archive to end 1st August 2005 – 17th August 2005 – 11 September 2005 02:53 (UTC) – 26 September 2005 – 22 October 2005 – 19 November 2005 – 5 December 2005 – 3 January 2006 – 20 January 2006 – 5 February 2006 – 4 March 2006 – 23 March 2006 – 3 April 2006

My RfA

Hi Splash. Just a quick note to thank you for voting on my RfA, which recently passed 62/13/6. I want to let you know that I will do my best to address all concerns that were raised during the RfA. I will also do my very best live up to this new responsibility and to serve the community, but please let me know if I make any mistakes or if you have any feedback at all on my actions. Finally, if there is anything that I can assist you with - please don't hesitate to ask. Cheers TigerShark 04:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

March admin statistics

I have collected some data that may be of use to you in your ~~War on~~ activities related to Page Protection. — Apr. 4, '06 [08:41] <freakofnur_xture |talk>

Please don't call it that. I unprotect what others forget to is all. (Plus the occasional difference of opinion.) Interesting data, though. -Splash^talk 15:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the sarcastic terminology. I thought I'd make you aware of this information without necessarily implying that I agree with your use of it. — Apr. 4, '06 [20:34] <freakofnur_xture |talk>

What would you say to an expiry option on the protect button, similar to the block expiry? -- Tawker 15:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. I talked about this with FoN a while back. I can certainly see the sense, since admins are very forgetful (and then get upset when I remember for them...). But I rather fear we'd finish up with a similar situation to what happens when someone shortens a block. We'd also likely legitimise the "indefinite" option which is something I am deeply uncomfortable with. I know that all protections are indefinite at the moment, but not in the same way as having a menu option for it. -Splash^talk 15:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue with having to keep the infinite button around is some pages have to be fully protected all of the time. Imagine if we unprotected the front page or the AWB checkpage. All that being said, protection is a necessary evil sometimes, something best avoided. I don't know about people complaining about shortening of an protection, the protection really is a stop gap measure (that can possibly stop a lot of godo faith editors from editing) whereas the block restricts (hopefully) one person. It's food for thought, if I have time I might draft up a proposal for it. On a second note, if you have itme could you take a look at User:Tawkerbot2/FAQ - its an FAQ page for the bot that hopefully explains what it does in a newbie friendly way, I don't know how it reads from someone who doesn't know its inner workings, and I'm a little concerned it might be too "geek speekish". Cheers -- Tawker 16:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those examples are true; I hadn't considered those. Actually, I think people would take the appearance of the option as sanction for the use of the option, when even on George W. Bush there is at best an uneasy truce regarding this rather than any consensus supporting it. If you decide to make a proposal, taking it to WT:SEMI would be the place to start, I guess. Or maybe WP:PPol. I copyedited the FAQ. I think it's good. -Splash^talk 16:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a thought - how about a button that allows a maximum protection time of seven days for things in the article space. That way, continued protection after the expiry would at least have to be someone's conscious act. BD2412 T 20:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if there was an optional protection expiration date, similar to how administrators are able to block for a definite amount of time (15 minutes, 24 hours, permanently, et cetera). Are the developers able to implement this? Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to the hard limit on protection, the only disadvantage I see to this is the deleted pages that we protect to prevent re-creation, maybe an override for 'bcrats and ArbCom / Stewards / Jimbo might be necessary. I was just on the tech channel and Rob Church says there's a bug report for it somewhere (and being stupid and not finding the right keyword, I haven't found the URL yet) but it looks like it might be dooable (though probally on the list of bugs to fix its faster 550 or so) -- Tawker 21:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of having to consciously renew protection in article space. Tawker's problems remain, though and I'm not sure that handing it to bureaucrats is necessarily desirable given their marginal activity levels, but they'd have very few pages per day/week to actually handle and they'd not be critical immediately. Perhaps a function to mark as a {deletedarticle} is the way to handle it, though we're left with Main Page and the other mission-critical pages to deal with. So maybe, as cscwem suggests, just port the blocking interface to the protection interface; presumably the additional code is small. I'd like to see "indefinite" suppressed from that list, though. Or maybe we'd have to SHOUT about a new convention: in the same way we don't indef-block IPs even though we could, we don't indef-protect articles. I'm thinking out loud here, really. -Splash^talk 22:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or it could be easier to create a dynamically-generated Special: page, like Special:Longprotected, that would list all the pages that have been left protected for, let's say, 30 days or more. The problem with the current category scheme is that you can't figure out which pages were protected ten minutes ago and which ones are permanently protected. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be relatively easy to write a query on the toolserver for that purpose. Kelly Martin (talk) 00:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that'd be great. Something like the PROD listing, maybe. It'd making cleaning CAT:SEMI much less painful and time-consuming than it is at the moment. I guess, if that can't be done by some willing toolserverite, that we could use the auto-dating that the {{nsd}} uses, although it would mean substing the template into article space which is suboptimal. -Splash^talk 01:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am Encephalon, and I approve this idea. —Encephalon 02:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GENIUS - a prod for seeing articles that have been semi'd too long (though I'd make them show up before 30 days). BD2412 T 02:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure running it on the toolserver is a good idea, as we're killing it... it has a 1.5 day lag already. Anyone know PHP? Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 04:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stopped indenting because it was going to get a little small. An idea I had thought of and discussed with splash a bit is having a specific syntax in the protection summary, an expiry time or so (in hours.) A bot would keep track of the changes and then unprotect when the time had expired. The biggest downside that I can see is this would require giving a bot sysop and I am not exactly happy about that thought (if this one was operating this would be very very public code). Nothing serious at this point but its potential food for thought -- Tawker 03:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It could simply report in one place which protections needed to be lifted at which times, and admins could monitor that one place, ~~crossing them out~~ as they carried out the unprotections. No need for bots with guns. Stevage 23:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Splash I need your help! This is neptunekh! Danny Lilithborne is deleteing all the links I'm putting on the pages! Why is he doing this? Can you talk to him? Please help me!

Help with COPYVIO?

Hi, how do I resolve COPYVIO in Statistical Analysis and Design of Integrated Circuits? The original author intended the article to be in public domain --- how and where should this be indicated? (we can even add this to the Web site where the orig. article has been archived). Apologies for cluelessness —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igor Markov (talk • contribs)

P.S. Another issue is what to do with the "unencyclopedic nature" of the article, as someone put it. The comment about the subjective nature of statistical analysis in general is irrelevant to this article. Also, as other people put it, the topic is extremeley important and has fundamental value.

Jamiat-e Islami and Jamiat Islami

I merged and redirected the former to the latter. All I merged actually (there wasn't much) was the Afghanistan stub tag and that the group was opposed to the Taliban. I was bold and removed a lot of unsourced content from the latter page. Perhaps it was true, but they were rather extreme accusations that really needed sources and the page had had tags for some time without any improvement on the page. There was also evidence of trolling, in that it was claimed one of the members had raped relatives of Wikipedians who edited the page![1] (what sort of message should be given to that IP, vandalism? NPA?) The page may need more attention. I'm still not sure if it is the same group or related to Jamaat-e-Islami so I posted on the talk page of that one and asked. Шизомби 13:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have a shiny thing

		The Original Barnstar
		For fixing the utc template thing and speeding up current events in the process. Saved me the job of having to dig into nested template hell. GraemeL ^(talk) 16:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you! I hope that someone more technically knowledgeable than I about the inner gwerkings of (meta-)templates might be able to pinpoint a specific diagnosis. -Splash^talk 22:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question for you (semi-urgent)

Please take a moment or two to read this post [2]. I would appreciate any comments you care to make on the issue, either here or on my own talk page, as you choose. Thanks in advance, Splash! Hamster Sandwich 17:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talk page. -Splash^talk 21:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input, old bean! The nature of the dispute by other involved admins of the terms that Prasi90 and I have agreed on seems to hinge on the policy of a single warning that would be issued to Prasi90 in the event of a backslide into bad behaviours. Since the purpose of the mentorship is to provide instruction to this editor, I think the single warning method is crucial to the "program" so to speak. It's the only way I can see to provide instruction and chastisement for any bad behaviour regarding editing. I am not intransigent on the issue though, but the editors who would deny this avenue are the ones who have been in the past most badly burned by Prasi90. Any further suggestions? My initial impulse is to take this single point and put it at RfC to gather some neutral party input, and perhaps in doing so convince MONGO, MegamanZero, and Gator1 of the benefit of commencing in the way outlined in the mentorship agreement. Also I should point out that the agreement was in the larger part draughted by Prasi90, and the only stipulations I added were that he aquiant himself thouroughly with specific WP policies and guidelines ie. WP:NPOV, WP:AGF, and WP:NPA. If I can help turn him around, any effort I make will be worth it. As a sidebar, could you please keep an eye on IP 198.20.32.254. I removed two blocks on that IP the past week, one was a 30 day block, the most recent a 1 week block. The IP is assigned to a large school board representing over 50 schools and tens of thousands of students. I have left messages with the blocking admins to the effect that blocks on such IP's should be in the 15 minute range, as recommended on the Wikipedia:Block user page. Thanks again for your consideration into my questions, Splash. I appreciate the work you do. Best regards, Hamster Sandwich 16:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Permission of a very shaky kind?

Splash, SIGDA does not own permissions, although it shouldn't be difficult to improve related policies in the next 6 months or so. In the meantime, all I have is the explicit permission of the author. If that's too shaky, then we basically have no way of releasing such contributions to the Wikipedia.

Another technical possibility is for us not to archive the "What is...?" column on the SIGDA Web server, and instead point to the Wikipedia. That would prevent automatic COPYVIO alerts, but does not strike me as a particularly bright solution.

Other than that, the idea of merging the discussion of statistical effects from Statistical Analysis and Design of Integrated Circuits into Integrated circuit is fine with me. However, I won't have time to do that in the near future due to travel, end-of-semester craziness, and such. If you are interested, that'd be great :) Igor Markov^talk

--Igor Markov 23:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

When confused

My wiki-hero is the first person to whom I turn. I happened across an old text (1905 to be exact) which gives the lyrics to many bawdy sea shanties. For some bizarre reason, I think I'd like to waste time transcribing them into some wiki. Without much context, none of them deserve articles here. After brief searching, I don't see many folk song lyrics at either Wiki-Source or Wiki-Commons, so I'm not sure where to put them. Please advise, sage leader! :) Xoloz 03:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question re speedy delete

Aplolgies for bothering you; I haven't interacted with you before, but saw that you were recently active and I am assuming that you are an admin / sysop. If not, apologies x2. I nominated AV Voice Changer Software for speedy delete, db-copyvio, and the creator removed the tag. I don't want to edit war; I'm not sure of protocol. I know I'm running the risk of not being WP:BOLD, but I guess I'd rather be WP:CIVIL. Again, assuming you're an admin, can you review my speedy nom and either act on it or whack me with a wet fish for being too eager? Thanks, Colonel Tom 09:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should have made it clear before; I don't know the protocol when a tag is removed and a (quick) wikisearch didn't enlighten me. That's why I'm taking the liberty of asking you for your opinion / advice / intervention. Cheers, Colonel Tom 09:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I might have erred, then, as I have added the urls in the articles to the speedy tags that another admin kindly replaced for me. Copyvio, then, not db-copyvio, is the right way to go. Many thanks for your assistance.

Can I also clarify; are copyvio issues NOT to be raised at AFD? Thanks again. Colonel Tom 13:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've done my work for me by adding the copyvio tags. Thank you very much. Colonel Tom 13:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We seem to be x-replying simultaneously. Thanks for your work, and the clarification re deletion hierachy. They are already on my watchlist. At the risk of repetition, thanks again.Colonel Tom 13:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fan sites

Hi my name is Neptunekh Is it ture that Wikipedia doesn't accpect fansites. Why not? Thank you!

Hi Spalsh. This is Neptune Kh. My problem is whenever I try to links on the SailorMoon pages this user called Danny Lilithborne deletes them. He says wikipedia doesn't allow fansites. Could you talk to him? I just don't understand him. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neptunekh (talk • contribs) 21:15, 2006 April 7

Copyvio?

Apologies for bothering you but you seem to have some interest in copyright violations. Can I draw your attention to Talk:Acts of the claimant. If you are not the appropriate person to ask for guidance, perhaps you could pass on the request for advice on how to proceed from here. Many thanks in advance. David91 01:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, this is the responsive post on my talk page:

Right, I don't really care. We sorted this out already, so like, no more large essays on my talk page that I'm not going to read. Wickethewok 02:24, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I interpret this correctly Wickethewok either now accepts that there never was a copyright infringement or, if there was, I have now rectified it. But, as I understand the system, I am not supposed to remove the copyvio tag and merge the /temp version back into the main text? Sorry to be a nuisance but I am anxious not to do the wrong thing here. David91 03:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was rather conscious of the fact that I work at odd hours and I was waiting for you to resurface. This is the first time I have been cited for a copyvio so I was unsure what the procedure was. I have delayed making progress of the /temp page except for one addition earlier today (I would normally have finished the article and have been on to the next in the sequence by now, so this has all reather delayed my schedule). It would be helpful if you could merge it all back into one ensuring that the /temp version is the dominant. Once again, thank you. seems completely indifferent as to the disrutpive effect he/she has had, and has no interest in conforming to the process as I understand it. If only he/she had asked me first, all this could have been avoided. Still, if the world was perfect, I suppose it would be less fun (or something). David91 12:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Once again, my apologies for having disturbed you. I would, of course, have made the note you suggest at copyright central (which is where I noted your activity) but Wickethewok never bothered to register the tag. I have been wondering whether I should have registered it myself as a means of resolving this, but plaguing an admin seemed potentially more efficient. :) Anyway, after a snack, I shall get back to work again. David91 12:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slow date math templates

Hi. I was chatting with Tim Starling on #wikipedia last night, and he said he wrote some PHP code to address the problem. You know, using templates with {{switch}} to do math by table lookup! There might be something to play with (on Meta?) by this weekend. Keep your fingers crossed. --Uncle Ed 17:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO your revert went much too far

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Template%3ATimezones&diff=47429590&oldid=47025180

best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sofixit. -Splash^talk 14:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Grin

Any particular reason as to why this was deleted ? <grin> Renmiri 03:06, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was previously deleted by TfD, as I indicated in my deletion summary, so the speedy was per WP:CSD#G4. There was a lengthy, dual debate about templatising smilies, and the result was to remove the templates. So I've re-deleted. Finding out what the reason for deletion was does not involve recreating the template. -Splash^talk 14:57, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should clarify: the original decision to close the debate as a keep was overturned on (then) WP:VFU via endorsing Violetriga's deletion of all of them. -Splash^talk 15:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sory, missed your answer. I restored the template after I read the decision to keep it from last year. I didn't know it was reverted. I wonder if the reversal was based on the erroneous assumption that the images were copvio. They are not, see Template:PhpBBimg for details. Anyhow, Template:Eek, Template:Redface and the images. are still out there Renmiri 23:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The images for the smilies are all GNFD, they come with the GNU licensed open source Forum package phpBB, do they have to go also ? Renmiri 23:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture upload

Hi Splash, remember our last communications about image uploading? Well I just did one at this article's page Laarbi Batma. Now the problem may be that when I uploaded the file I didn't know which category to use so the template I finally selected on the picture's page may not be the right one see page: Image:Laarbi Batma-1985.jpg . My intention was to stress that the picture does not belong to anyone and it could be confirmed by email from the editor in chief of a moroccan news website. I was assured that even the newspaper used the picture without any copyright-related problem. Can you pls help me out with this? I've also asked user:FayssalF for his help as well on how to play around with the layout and formatting. Thanks a bunch, Angelikmeg 08:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okidoki. Will forward the email to permissions! Thanks a lot.--Angelikmeg 17:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hi, this is Matt Yeager. I wanted to thank you for your vote on my request for adminship. The count was something like was 14/20/5 when I decided to withdraw the request. My decision was based on the fact that there are enough things wasting people's time on the Internet that doomed RFA's shouldn't be kept up for voters to have to think about. Regardless of the rationale behind your vote, I hope you will read this note for an extended note and discussion on what will happen before I make another try at adminship (I didn't want to clog up your userpage with drivel that you might not be interested in reading). Thank you very, very much for your vote and your time and consideration of my credentials--regardless of whether you voted support, nuetral, or oppose. Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 01:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which discussion are you referring to in my Rfc?

I am just curious to know where I edited the same page than you on the same discussion. -Lumière 16:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was a thread over at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources. Probably archived by now. -Splash^talk 10:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TawkerbotC

Well, mostly I registered it because Tawkerbot has a "fan club" of sorts who like to make impostor accounts. It's not really a dopplegranger because it is a sensible password, It was a thought and a defensive registration. I'm still not 100% on giving it auto delete, I actually oppose the idea but I'm not 100% opposed to something if it has very very strong community request and it can be 100% accurate (it would be an even bigger QA job than Tawkerbot2) so trust me, I'm not planning on making any susprise bots. I will, on the other hand start going through the list manually, ahh that is a big list (orphaned fair use images is big enough thank you very much, and I need something to do while I wait for my info requests to come back!). But seriously, if you have any questions or concerns, give me a shout, I'm still a little bit of a newbie at WP adminship, I must be annoying the IRC channel with my "how do I handle this" questions :o -- Tawker 03:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, it does appear that the idea of auto delete (which I wasn't happy with anyways) is taboo so I'm going to forget about that. I'm not as sure about the new large articles though, if we could catch those at the source (within 48h of creation) it might be a good thing, though only to put a template tag on the page, no sysop at all. Do you think this would work? -- Tawker 14:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, it would work more similar to Tawkerbot2. It would grab the large new page pings from pgkbot then grab the text of the new page then google a random phrase. if google returns the exact phrase (and checking that page returns a 75% to 100% match) it would put a suspected copyvio on the talk page along w/ the URL it found. Tagging every large new page as a copyvio is a waste of everyone's time but if we can give a location to look it might work -- Tawker 15:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Escaped quotes and blocks of anons

The anon-ip user User:72.232.33.146 (two contribs, both with double-escaped single quotes) is not currently blocked. Neither, as it happens, is User:84.245.75.24, whose contribs also show multiple cases of this. After reading User talk:Kelly Martin#Backslash-apostrophes, I'm none the wiser on what I should do to ask admins to consider blocking anon from these ips, and searching for \\\' doesn't work, strangely enough. Can you help ? Many thanks, Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation discussion

Splash, please see my comment on the admin noticeboard. As I said there, my reference to combative editors was meant to refer to people who insult instead of discuss and that it did not refer to anyone in the discussion. My apologies for not being more precise and for any insult you saw in my statement. Also, I have no intention to be the "one editor offering to sweep any objections under the carpet." As I've already said in the discussion, since there is strong opposition to any bot deleting articles then we should not allow that to happen. However, if a bot could allow a human admin to more easily deal with the large backlog on the copyright problems page, while still leaving the ultimate decision to delete up to the human admin, then I think that would be useful to have. Best, --Alabamaboy 13:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neologisms

Hi Splash, I noticed you just edited the neologism guideline. I am proposing a rewrite of that, and would appreciate your comments on my draft. You can find the link at Wikipedia_talk:Avoid neologisms. Thanks. -- cmh 04:14, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IRC Messag

Done, sorry about the delay, I'm on a semi wikibreak for the next 4 days as I'm down to a dial up account, so I might be a ~~little~~ lot slower to reply than usual (not worth bringing in broadband at the cottage for 4 weeks a year :o). Feel free to leave me a message if you need anything -- Tawker 05:53, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Special characters

I noticed that the delist script occasionally can't find and article because a character in what it is searching for, like "ł", ends up like "Å". If this happens to you, just tell me what the mix up was, and i'll add a .replace() corrector for it.Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 21:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speeking of protection, it sems like CAT:SEMI is balooning again. Many of these don't seem to be listed on WP:PP, too bad there wasn't a way to give all admins the script, so people would forget to list.Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 22:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair semiprotection

Hi. I see that you have unprotected Tony Blair. You may not be aware of the history here - I can fill you in if you like. For now though, please could you reinstate the semiprotection and take the discussion to Pages for Unprotection. Thanks SP-KP 22:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move request

Splash, would you mind moving Punk Pop to Punk pop following the naming convention? I'd do it myself but the latter already exists as a redirect. Thanks! -Isopropyl 22:45, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair again

Thanks for the reply. I'm aware that there is no consensus for indefinite semiprotection. What there is though is a process for requesting unprotection; all I'm asking is that you follow that process rather than acting unilaterally. If I'm wrong about this, please do correct me. Thanks SP-KP 22:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Is this documented anywhere? SP-KP 23:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Sorry to be a nuisance, but, given that it isn't documented, how do you know your interpretation is correct? SP-KP 23:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I disagree, mainly because it's also crazy to have a situation where there are articles which are certain to be vandalised as soon as sprot is lifted, so that an editor like me has to repeatedly request sprotection again, to have it guaranteed to be reinstated. This seems like something that ought to be discussed at the protection requests talk page, to see if we can establish a consensus. Arr you OK if I raise it there? SP-KP 23:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Issue raised at Wikipedia talk:Semi-protection policy. All the best SP-KP 23:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sprotect on Template:Republic of China politics

Regarding your recent removal of the {{sprotect}} tag on Template talk:Politics of the Republic of China, the tag refers to the template itself which is semiprotected as a result of a spate of POV pushing by anon IPs. Per convention, the {{sprotect}} tag was placed on the template talk page instead of the template page itself. This is the second time has mistakenly removed the tag, perhaps we need a protect tag especially for templates. -Loren 23:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The edit war was due to an anon using anon IPs to circumvent the 3RR. Though yeah, I agree that it can probably be lifted now. The convention (if it is one) I am referring to is listed under Wikipedia:Protection policy#How, under #3: If protecting a template, place the notice on its talk page instead. -Loren 23:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. We should probably change that then. -Loren 23:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protected pages

Thanks. I'll look at some of the pages I protected previously and remember to unprotect them after a short time in the future, and will be more active in this area by monitoring the semrpotected pages category. I also think it is important to monitor recently unprotected pages, particularly ones about schools which many people forget about, so I will do that as wel.l Academic Challenger 01:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technical articles on Wikipedia

Random thought: wouldn't it be nice to see more technical articles featured on Wikipedia? Polythiophene is an excellent article, but alas, probably will have the same fate as phase-shift keying...I suspect Rayleigh fading would too... --HappyCamper 01:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

McKhan

Splash, would you be willing to take a look at McKhan's recent behavior on Al-Ahbash?Timothy Usher 06:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy, Are you trying to get me banned? Didn't you just writ these lines: McKhan, I agree with your comment way back in the talk page, "However, Al-Ahbash / Habashies / AICP don't appreicate that nor the fact that if I will write that page according to my wishes, that page will NOT be somewhat NEUTRAL like the way Tearlach has written."Timothy Usher 02:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC) - McKhan[reply]

Your relentless personalization of discussions is unacceptable, as a glance through the page's history will show. It is also entirely inappropriate to say you've been watching my edit history and insinuate that you somehow know where I live or what I do. Finally, consider the content of the article as it stands. Everything I've seen from you in our brief period of contact constitutes an ongoing violation of several wikipedia policies.

The reason I wrote what you've just referenced is that it shows that you consciously and deliberately wrote the article in a non-neutral way.Timothy Usher 07:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I NEVER wrote the complete version of Al-Ahbash. Tearlach wrote it. All I did is to include that table and I invited all the knowledgeable parties to get involved. Lets be honest and fair here. I suggested to you many times, on the Talk page of Al-Ahbash, that please go and educate yourself about the subject (in this case: Al-Ahbash) before contributing to Wikipedia Islam-related pages. Rather taking my suggestion seriously and sincerely, you are simply trying to offer your arguments which constitutes to POVs under Wikipedia guidelines. And on the top of that, you are trying to get me banned which is NOT only inappropriate but also uncivil as you are trying to force your POVs over the POVs who are directly affected and have some know-how of the subject. As far as, the knowledge of your wherabouts is concerned, It was listed on your own User Page sometime ago. It is perfectly normal and legitimate to see through the History of Wikipedia pages. How does it constitue to violaiton of Wikipedia guidelines? Even the Administrators do that. And last but not the least, as far as Al-Ahbash is concerned, Tearlach's version, a NEUTRAL, non-Muslim and non-Al-Ahbash party, continues to meet the Wikipedia NPOV guidelines - than - Al-Ahbash / Habashies' partially and promotionally written version which does NOT only lack balance but also elminates all the contrary elements. It is disservice and blatant violation of Wikipedia NPOV-guidelines to support a partially and promotionally written version. McKhan

May I take your kind attention to this Request for Check User which is pertinent in due course. McKhan

Unprotect of Chiranjeevi

Hi, am currently on a wiki break. As I indicated in the listing, it needed to be sprotected due to IPs from different ranges and I felt a week's sprotect would be good enough and indicated the same in the listing. I couldn't unprotect it due to my wiki brk. Thanks for doing it. btw, I haven't protected any other articles. Keep up the good work. --Gurubrahma 13:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World Trade Center bombing

Hi there. You protected this about 10 days ago. Since WP:SEMI is for dealing with serious, current vandals, I figure it's been more than long enough to unprotect it now. Can I ask you to check your other recent protections and lift them as necessary, also to remember protections in general? CAT:SEMI is (actually, was) nearly 100 items, most of them seem to have been forgotten by the protecting admin. Thanks. -Splash^talk 22:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry 'bout that. I too forgot I had protected it. I second your unprotect. -- Zanimum 14:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edwin Ushiro

Hi - Re the question at the help on moving Edwin ushiro. Looks like a non-notable autobio (hence speediable) to me - do you agree? -- Rick Block (talk) 23:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's gone. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Starfield

Hey, thanks for undeleting the page. Actually, I'm not an admin (the RFA referenced above failed), but I appreciate that you undeleted the article. It will be rewritten with some external links, etc. Thanks again. Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 01:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Spring celebration / Easter (as your preferences and beliefs dictate)

Here's hoping that if the bunny leaves you any beans they're this kind! ++Lar: t/c 15:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of cities without visibility of total solar eclipses for more than one thousand years

Hello,

First of all, thanks for your support. I can't argue about the content of the original article, as I never saw it. However, I promise that I will personally see to it that it is reliable. I could for example also include the answer to the question posed by JoshuaZ, as I indicated on his talk page. I can't recreate it from scratch however, as I don't have the factual content at my disposal. I think it will be easier to undelete and then give it an extreme makeover.

Regards, Nick Mks 16:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Imdb title

It was the Template itself that had the sprotection on it, not the Talk page. I put it on the Talk page because I didn't want to put it on the actual Template page, but Locke Cole seems to have added a notice to the Template page so I guess it doesnt matter. Cheers, Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 21:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alameda High Page

i did not know how to protect it, so i just copied the correct code from one of the FAQ pages. the page has been repeatedly vandalized over time. please tell me on my talk page how to protect something. thank you. Skhatri2005 19:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PP

I was going through the list of protected pages doing a bit of cleaning and noticed that you'd unprotected Fidel Castro, Proof (rapper), Rachel Marsden, Chiranjeevi and Arthur Miller but forgot to remove them from the WP:PP list; just a friendly nudge. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 21:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Spam

There seems to be some, err, confusion as to what constitutes a precendent here and I'd like some wider input. While everyone knows I live only to delete, I'd be happy to keep based upon something other than a manufactured "precedent," so I transform myself into Sir Spam-a-lot and hose people whose opinions I respect. oh, and you.

brenneman ^{L} 05:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Office authority

If I do something like that, please assume it is with office authority. I do not delete pages because I do not like the content. Danny 16:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD

You may be interested in Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_April_12#Template:Otheruses4, which was deleted last year, but has come back from the dead. ed g2s • talk 23:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As per your advice I have put the future tvshow template up for TFD. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 18:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for you

Email me. IRC. Find me. I'm looking for you. --BradPatrick 21:57, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed you just this minute. I was doing my reading-up. -Splash^talk 22:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review-> History only Deletion-> Charities accused of having ties to terrorism

The original talk page for Talk:Charities accused of ties to terrorism was "lost." PLEASE restore it. Thanks. KI 01:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right... fixed the above link... apparently the talk was lost... as I stated above... KI 01:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you, but in that case, would you please inform User:GRuban and User:Geo Swan that they are ~~full of it~~ mistaken in that the talk page was never lost when I moved the page and GRuban moved it back. Thanks, KI 01:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help me, Obi-Wan Spalsh; you're my only hope.

I'd changed the references on List of sexual slurs to Footnotes4 because it's more compact, shows what's from where, etc etc. It's been switched back as there's been a complaint that multiple references to a single work don't have the page number displayed. (I've put it in the invisible section after the ref name but before the slash.) I'm plowing throught the enor-mouse talk page at WP:FOOTNOES, but this looks bad. Any insight? - brenneman ^{L} 06:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editor review

Since you have had at least a fair amount of interaction with me and have some views on my editing I was wondering if you'd be willing to give me some advice on how to be a better editor, either here, on my talk page or on the editor review page. Thanks. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 19:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Stalking

I have had the problem of stalking admins 2 from norway that seem to think they own the place. Other than disrupting internet service how can I make sure that my additions of notable people don't get deleted like the article I did about Greg Christenson. Why must this happen I thought wiki was about generating valid very reputable original works.

If you could help me from these 2 that will remain nameless for now I would appreiate it. Thanks or at least let me know a contact or email that will help me pursue a purposeful wiki existance.

Thanks.

Semi-protection question

I recently unprotected John Cena when I came across it doing a bot edit and noticed it was semi-protected, and had been for 3 weeks. Acting like you, I suppose, I unprotected it, and they're angry at me. What should I say? — Apr. 24, '06 [06:42] <freakofnur_xture |talk>

RfC? or ArbCom?

My Wiki-Lord,

I haven't begun either of these things before, but I am beginning to feel action is appropriate re: Linuxbeak. The former is more appropriate procedurally, but the latter might be in order to end "creative bludgeoning" at RfA before it multiplies. Thoughts, sir? Your wisdom is eternal, Xoloz 15:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Computers and innocent users have been blocked by user Mikkalai

Hi Splash,

Thank you for unsprotecting the Kven article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kven at "22:32, 22 March 2006 Splash (unsprot: weird reason to protect and it's been long enough anywa)".

We now ask for your assistance in reference to the same article, please, for the following reasons:

Despite of many pleas for him to do so, the above mentioned user with "weird reasoning" - Fred chessplayer - has not provided sources for his claims, which are not - to our knowledge -supported by any known historians and/or other scientists.

Furthermore, users opposing the views of Fred chessplayer have provided their distinguished sources on the Kven discussion page, and particularly in the Kven text version itself, which Fred chessplayer (now also Mikkalai) keeps reverting into his own text version, which includes his unfounded claims (the given sources do not agree with his views).

Below are just a couple examples of the serious shortcomings of the Kven text version by Fred chessplayer, which the user Mikkalai has now blocked several users of correcting, or of reverting to a version furbished with information which is approved by historians, together with matching sources. The following exact quotes given first are from the currently standing Fred chessplayer's Kven text. Fred chessplayer's claims are followed by correct information (the sources offered in Fred chessplayer's own text version agree with this correct information, but not with the claims of Fred chessplayer):

1. "Kvens (alternate spellings: Cwen, Kven, Kvæn, Kveeni, Quen) were a historical group of people that lived in the coastal areas around the Gulf of Bothnia, part of today's Finland."

There is a wide concensus among historians, that large areas of today's Northern Sweden, particularly the areas around the Gulf of Bothnia, were also part of the historical Kvenland.

Thus, the historic Kvenland areas are not only "part of today's Finland", but also part of today's Sweden (and - according to many historians - perhaps also part of today's Norway, even parts of today's extreme Northwestern Russia according to some evidence, including historic maps).

2. "Possibly, Kvens referred to all Finnish people. (Suomen historia (History of Finland), page 27, Jouko Vahtola, Professor of Finnish and Scandinavian history. )."

On the above mentioned page, Professor Vahtola does not claim such a thing. He only says that in 870 AD the "Kven" reference made by the Norwegian explorer was - perhaps - ment to refer to Finns in general. He is not discussing there any of the numerous other references to Kvens.

Professor Vahtola himself indeed has - in his various books - made it clear that Kvens are a separate group within the Finnish/Finnic people, and that the term "Kven" - used in various historic texsts - has not referred to the Finnish people in general, but to a historic group/tribe of people. There is a wide concensus about this matter among historians.

3."In literature, the first known occurance of the Kven in the Account of the Viking Othere, a chronicle in the time of King Alfred the Great in the 9th century AD."

According to the distinguished Kven expert, the Professor Emeritus Kyösti Julku, the first reference to the Kven people in literature was made by the Roman historian Gornelius Julius Tacitus in 98 AD.

4."Before the 8th century there are scarsely any remains of the Kvens."

On the contrary: The archaeological evidence of agricultural settlement on the Finnish side of the Bothnian Gulf is strong before the 9th century, and it gets weaker during the Viking period.

The Wikipedia user Mikkalai has also kept reverting to the above mentioned Kven text version by the user Fred chessplayer. Despite of requests, neither one of those users have provided sources for the claims by Fred chessplayer, nor have they answered to the questions about the above mentioned and other shortcomings, misrepresentations and distortions of facts.

Some of the less important peaces of information in the current Kven text is correct, thanks to the contributions by users other than Fred chessplayer or Mikkalai. Much of the current text, however, is not reflecting the opinions of the utmost experts of the Scandinavian and Finnish history, nor does the current information match the views of the sources and references offered on the current Kven page.

On the other hand, the text version "16:20, 18 April 2006 Ppt" provides valid information with maching distinguished sources and references, including a couple of exact quotes of the wordings by known Kven experts.

Could you, Splash, kindly please unblock the following computer: 213.216.199.2. ... and the following user: Art Dominique ? - Art Dominique -

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to get involved in a content dispute at present. Perhaps take a read through Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. If you think you have been unfairly blocked, post a short, succinct message on WP:AN/I. -Splash^talk 19:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A heads up

OK Mr. Anon Editing. :) Look at this. I have a feeling you have an opinion on it. :) Hell I'm not sure that I agree with it. The aims are noble, but I just don't see the benefit. --Woohookitty^(meow) 23:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just another RFA thank you note

Dear Splash, I appreciate your vote and your kind words in my RFA. It has passed with an unexpected 114/2/2 and I feel honored by this show of confidence in me. Cheers! ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 04:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

important update

I know that you have moved away from protection for while, but when you have the time, please update your protection js. With the update, special characters are no longer misparsed (even the AfD listers still tend to have that problem).Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 06:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Format? What is it?

Man, a we got a rash of request that don't meet protection standards [3]. I keep trying to format and have the RfPP make it clearer that people should read policy or even the brief text of RfPP about when to protect, but people don't seem to notice. Any suggestions?Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 06:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ati3414

Ati3414 has returned from the ban you gave him only to post many insults, strong accusations, and ad hominem attacks on my talk page. I posted a notice here and was hoping that you could help calm this user down. Gregory9 17:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another admin suggested a temporary solution. It appears to be working, so hopefully the situation is resolved now. Gregory9 10:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource

I realize you deal with a lot maintanence here and have seen your name in the histories of several pages tagged as move to Wikisource. We have recently altered s:Wikisource:What Wikisource includes to excludes all sorts of unaffiliated reference data, including source code. Please take a minute to read over that page and let me know if you have any questions.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 05:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Freestylefrappe

User:Freestylefrappe was deleted, then I recreated it with a disclaimer and now the history is lost. Can you restore the history? Thanks, KI 15:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this is being discussed at WP:DRV. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 17:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Domingo

Can you block this guy again Special:Contributions/71.34.127.199. Thanks Arniep 21:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication

copied from the history of User talk:BD2412 Jay 23:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for starting the policy page for that. I had made it a redirect since I couldn't find anything on the topic except in Wikipedia:Jargon but everyone seemed to aware and talking of it. One of the articles I listed for undeletion (List of software companies) was userfied. I don't know why it was userfied and where to look for it now. Jay 18:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for that particular userfication was made clear during the deletion review debate, and I gave a link at that time to User:Jay/List of software companies. This link is also available from the page history view which is available to you as an admin. -Splash^talk 18:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After I click on the userfied link, what next. Where do I get the contents of the original page from ? From the history ? Also whats the point in userfying a page that is supposed to be in the article namespace ? How will someone get to know that the deleted page is now userifed? Jay 18:52, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably, if it's been userfied, then it didn't belong in the article namespace. The only one who needs to know that is the original author, who is supposed to be informed. BD2412 T 18:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all the previous revisions are in the history. I didn't revert when I moved it to your userspace just because I figure that the state of user subpage is for the user to decide themselves. The article was deleted from the article namespace, and the deletion review was happy enough with the userfication instead. You said were going to make a category out of it, I think. -Splash^talk 19:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't answered the question : How will someone get to know that the deleted page is now userifed ? I obviously cannot populate a category on my own, I need support from other contributors. Now how does it help that a page which was in the article namespace has been userfied where probably no one knows that it exists ? Jay 23:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes!

I may need your help patrolling WP:PP. Since I've longsinced fixed all the bugs with the regular protection JS (please update yours)...though I still can make it smaller, I decided to make some other script. I made another script that lists articles protected or semiprotected form the category pages WITH the date/user/explanation (as retrieved from the logs). Look how long it is now! I'll keep patrolling this for obvious unprotects each day.Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 06:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Color stubs

While I do not particularly disagree with the rationale for deleting articles such as Terracotta (color) and Tomato (color), I cannot help but notice that well-meaning wikipedians (such as myself :) keep recreating them. I think that it would be wise to put appropriate context-aware notes at the relevant articles, perhaps along the lines of This article is about the vegetable Tomato. "Tomato" is sometimes used as a color name; for details please see List of colors#Tomato. Please notice that a current AfD asks wikipedians not to recreate a separate article for the color. What do you think?

Hi Splash^talk / re: Kven

Splash^talk, do you think you may be able to put a sponsoring word of some kind to the following site for me: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kven users RfC

If you still recall, you saw some bad behavior which I have had to face for some time. Those folks teamed up to use tactics which you at one point called "weird" (in reference to a blocking action taken by user Fred-Chess).

Thank you one way or another. See ya !

Art Dominique Art Dominique, may 9, 2006, 17:54

Hey

Hi Splash. It's been two weeks, and I hope all is well with you and yours. Take care, ya? I hope to see Wikipedia's best administrator back some time, though.;-) All my very best —Encephalon 02:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really. No contributions for two weeks? I hope you didn't get hit by a bus or anything. Seriously, if you know you're going to be gone for a while please leave some sort of hint. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is one vigil I must join. I point interested readers to Woohookitty's comment above, which gives me the hope that Splash is with us, and just incognito; also, it is that time of year when academics (even esteemed Ph.D candidates) have lots of work to do, so I'm not quite panicked yet. Still, wiki-life without one's mentor is sad and lonely, so do want you to know you're very sorely missed. Admiringly, Xoloz 20:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, what's the deal, buddy? I knew something was askew about this place. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 23:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing that unless we get rid of a couple of our excellent admins whenever we introduce a new crop of three certain-to-be-excellent ones, the balance in the force is disturbed. So now we need to promote someone really BAD.
brenneman ^{L} 05:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With apologies, and with gratitude for the concern, I'm away for some time, and so only able to contribute here on a pay-per-edit basis. I am fine, but I find that being on a Wikibreak is actually really rather pleasant and so I am not entirely sure when I will return to editing regularly. Best wishes all, Splash^talk 00:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy your break! Steve block Talk 18:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's the rate? ;-) —Encephalon 00:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder + Suggestion

<snipped reminders about substing talk page templates and archiving this page. This page doesn't want to be archived at present -Splash^talk 00:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)> — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 03:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Daniel Brandt

I'd like to invite you to review and participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Daniel Brandt. This is not a request for your endorsement, simply a request for your participation in the discussion. Thank you. -- Malber (talk · contribs) 18:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]