Wikipedia

User:Prodego/archive/86

< User:Prodego‎ | archive


ACC access

Hello there, Prodego. Would you mind if you restored my ACC access? It was removed due to inactivity while I was blocked. Thanks. Cheers, —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 18:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Bad close

Did you even bother looking into the actual problems with Xanderliptak's behaviour here on enwiki? → ROUX ₪ 04:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Since those problems seem to all be solvable by not interacting with Beyond My Ken, I'd consider that resolved. If there are new similar problems then some action would be taken, but a solution is a solution, for now. Prodego talk 04:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Except they're not. Even the most cursory examination of the discussion on Commons vs. what Xanderliptak reported the discussion on Commons to be should show some, oh how do I put this, inconsistencies with regards to the facts. Have a word with Georgewilliamherbert about the problems with Xander's behaviour. The repeated claims are simply not supported by reality. To be perfectly frank, I proposed the voluntary disengagement of BMK so that admins could focus on the real source of disruption. → ROUX ₪ 04:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Commons is commons, we don't have anything to do with that. For the time being my analysis is that a) that thread isn't helping anything, and b) if there is a problem, it will resurface, and can be dealt with then. Xander is wrong regarding the license, and wrong about the analysis of the discussion of it, but there isn't anything to be gained by beating that to death, especially since it has nothing to do with this project. His behavior was aggressive and he attacked others, but that appears to only be related to this one incident so if it goes away, and the problem goes away, we are done. If the problem doesn't go away, we can do something about that then. Prodego talk 05:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
The problem has been ongoing for at least ten days, and is continuing at an AfD--more attacks and misrepresentation of what other people have said and done, not a single diff to prove it. But, fine, at least you've proved the admin resistance to looking at actual problems is consistent. I'm not going to bother reverting your close because that will just feed right into what Xanderliptak does all the time: deflect, deflect, create more drama so that his behaviour is too difficult to see through the smokescreen. → ROUX ₪ 05:08, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 07:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Your input is requested

I have started an RfC on inappropriate userboxes, i.e. those that don't follow the introductory paragraph at WP:UBX:

"A userbox (commonly abbreviated as UBX) is a small colored box ... designed to appear only on a Wikipedian's user page as a communicative notice about the user, in order to directly (or even indirectly) help Wikipedians collaborate more effectively on articles."

How does a userbox about a user's own preferences in regards to what topics on Wikipedia they hate and what type of sexually explicit material they like and actively view help Wikipedians collaborate with one another? Which is the question I am raising.

This introductory paragraph over at WP:UBX contradicts WP:NOTCENSORED so I'd like you to weigh in at WT:UBX, it'll only take 5 minutes of your time. I've sent this message because the topic has not had much community input

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 20:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC).

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Abuse Filter question

Hi. I want to set up an abuse filter which matches a set of badwords (using contains_any()) in the text. I want it to prevent saving the page if a badword exists in the new wikitext of the new version of THAT SECTION of page the user is editing. So for example if page is like this: 

== Section 1 ==
Text text badword.

== Section 2 ==
Text text.

== Section 3 ==
Text text badword.

And the user is replacing "text" with "test" in section 2, nothing should happen. However, if he is editing section 3 and NOT removing the badword from that section, he should be warned and saving should be disallowed.

Is that possible? (PS: I asked MZMcBride and he referred me to you) huji—TALK 23:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe that is possible to do. There is no easy way to identify what section is being edited from the abusefilter, short of comparing every line in the page before and after, then apply a regex to find the section boundaries. I don't believe that is possible, and if it is, it wouldn't be feasible. Now, if the section isn't nearby, then using added_lines and removed_lines will work. But they aren't a strict per section division, and there will be some overlap between sections. You can check if a word is added or not, but I don't think you would be able to identify sections. Prodego talk 00:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Conflict in Article of Andre Geim, winner of 2010 Nobel Prize

Hi, I am a foreigner and a simple reader of Wikipedia. Thank you very much for your job. Frankly say, Editing article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geim, is in a wrong way, by colluding of some editors and admins there. Their IDs are: Therexbanner, Gladsmile, Narking, Christopher Connor, RobertMfromLI, NickCT, Beetstra, 7. These Users are trying by reverting correct edits of the article, and doing a sort of anagram and "misusing" information in sources, show Mr. Andre Geim (winner of 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics) is not a Jewish and he has another ethnic. They seem like pure (but a bit hidden)vandalism. All correct RS sources, like:

- http://www.scientific-computing.com/features/feature.php?feature_id=1,

- http://www.russia-ic.com/education_science/science/breakthrough/1176/,

- http://www.forward.com/articles/131944/

- http://www.gazeta.ru/science/2010/10/07_a_3426604.shtml

- http://www.kfki.hu/chemonet/osztaly/kemia/ih.pdf

- http://onnes.ph.man.ac.uk/~geim/pt.html

- http://www.forward.com/articles/131944/

- http://www.russia-ic.com/education_science/science/breakthrough/1176/

- …


clearly show that Mr. Andre Geim is a Jewish (he repeatedly mentioned about his Jewishness, [subject of self-identification]) in ethnical point of view and his family was originated from Germany(he also several times mentioned that his family are German [origin]). Nowadays German is a general word, which could means: Citizenship, Nationality, Origin, residentship, and so on. When Geim is taking about German being of his family, clearly and logically he talks about their origin before emigration to Russia. There is the same situation about Richard Feynman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman. By the way in a reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Andre_Geim_interview_to_Yedioth_Ahronoth,_Oct_15_2010,_p._25.jpg, (that several times misused by above Users) Geim also said a story concerning Jewishness (clearly in religious point of view) of his grandmother, that of course it doesn’t mean that only his grandmother was a Jewish. Now in article as I checked the history of the article, above Users by reverting the correct edits there, try to present and show by their wrong way Mr. Geim an “ethnic” German person. The point is that in any RS sources, Geim hasn’t say that he has such ethnic, and he never used word “ethnic” there. Andre Geim won the Nobel Prize in the beginning of October; unfortunately, right after his winning until now, above Users kept the text of the article in a wrong position. In any case, if you have time, please check this Users carefully. By the way USER:Gladsmile, repeatedly reverted and undid the edits there, without any explanation(even wrong one). Personaly, seems like an extrimist Vandalism. BestAlexander468 (talk) 16:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm very busy lately, and I don't have the time to help you. I'll try to find someone to, if no one contacts you try posting to WP:ANI. Someone there will tell you what to do. Prodego talk 18:58, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

ACC

I was inactive on ACC for a while, and would like to regain tool access. Will you give me my ACC access back? Thanks. Cheers, —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 23:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, much appreciated. Cheers, —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 05:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Prodego/archive/86&oldid=1073629105"