User talk:Martijn Hoekstra/Archives/2009/November

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

• Article contest: Durova wins 2009 WikiCup

• Conference report: WikiSym features research on Wikipedia

• Election report: 2009 ArbCom elections report

• Audit Subcommittee: Inaugural Audit Subcommittee elections underway

• Dispatches: Wikipedia remembers the Wall

• News and notes: Strategic planning, November conference, brief news and milestones

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• WikiProject report: Project banner meta-templates

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

• Fundraiser: Controversial "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser to start 10 November

• New pages experiment: Wikipedians test the water at new page patrol

• German controversy: German Wikipedia under fire from inclusionists

• Multimedia usability: Multimedia usability meeting concludes in Paris

• Election report: Arbitration Committee candidate nominations open 10 November

• Book review: Review of Connected Minds, Emerging Cultures: Cybercultures in Online Learning

• News and notes: Ant images, public outreach, and more

• In the news: Beefeater vandalism, interview, and more

• Sister projects: Meta-wiki interview

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: HDDScan deletion

Thanks for your advice. I will consider rewriting the article. Just found copypasting from the existing source the most convinient way of writing :). You've mentioned the article as being promotional, it was not. I just feel Wiki has poor coverage of free software tools, and I hoped to write several articles on the most widely used (and still not covered) freeware. Reading guidelines and copyright politics may be boresome, but now I know it's the necessary evil :) Kaluzhanin (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It's even worse than that, they have grown to monsterous proportions. The requirements for new articles are quite elaborate, and due to the flurry of "My band is the r0x0rs" type of new articles, many Wikipedians have understandably become a little too triggerhappy. If you can reference independent realiable secondary sources to back up your article, you should be good. Try to make sure your sources are independent (not written by someone who is related to, or close to the subject), reliable, that is, meeting WP:RS, and secondary. This usualy boils down to an article published somewhere where there is some degree of editorial review. Note that forums, messageboards and such are usualy no good, self published websites neither, unless they are well regarded as an authority on the matter (and even then people will oppose them for being self-published). With articles in physical media like magazines and newspapers you're usualy good, but those are harder to find and cite. A last note, I couldn't find copyright information on the website, but if the text is published under the GFDL or CC-BY-SA 3.0 or compatible licences, a word for word copy is not a copyright infringement. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Why do you keep deleting the updated neogaf page ?

Why ? Its the truth, someone should know about the off topic forums befor visiting them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.54.120.210 (talk) 00:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I left some comments on the talkpage of the article. It is not written in an encyclopedic tone. I didn't find any secondary reliable sources for the section either. If you can find those, I would love to work with you, writing that section. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

CSD

I understand completely (actually, your phrasing just made me get the whole idea now!) and I prodded the article. Thanks for telling me; do you think this is something that would fall under the proposed [[1]] category? Again, thanks for completely clearing this up for me!-- fetchcomms☛ 16:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Actualy, I did the I R ADMIN thing, and deleted it under WP:IAR, but yeah, usually it would come under PROD. Glad I was making sense to you, hope I am still doing so after my actions just completely contradicted what I said :S Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for moving it. I forgot to put the User: in front of it. Bernstein2291 ^{(Talk • Contributions • Sign Here)} 19:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries, easy fix! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

98.206.68.45

Even if it took two days for me to catch the vandalism, he should be blocked. The guy replaced factual information with lies repeatedly over the course of several months. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 20:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up, I understand how annoying it must be. Still, I can't block him. It is an IP adress, and has made no edits today. I would have no idea knowing if the person who is behind the IP adress at this moment is the same person who made the edits. Therefor, I can't block him. I hope you understand. Thank you again for pointing it out! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

• Fundraiser: "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser begins

• Bulgarian award: Bulgarian Wikipedia gets a prestigious award

• Election report: Arbitration Committee Election: Several candidates standing

• News and notes: Kiswahili contest, new advisory board members, Foundation-l and more

• In the news: German lawsuit, Jimbo interview and more

• Sister projects: Wiktionary interview

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Felix Szydlo

Hi Martijn,

sorry, I am new to editing articles and did not know all the rules. Was just trying to create an article about an interesting teacher from past. Thanx for help, I hope I will be able to do better next time. David —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cole.porter (talk • contribs) 18:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That's no problem, there will always be someone around to help you with stuff. Feel free to edit in any area you like! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandal IP/account

Hallo Martijn--you just blocked an IP, at User talk:128.192.211.122, for vandalism; I have the impression that a new account may be a block-evader (see User talk:Regieg1). I don't know what to do, or if I should do anything, but I thought you might want to know. De groeten, en hup AZ, Drmies (talk) 18:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Meat puppeting is more likely, with autoblock. Anyway, it seems to have stopped now. I'll watch the article for a bit, and semi-protect if needed. Martijn Hoekstra (talk)

Gotver

Thanks for having a look over that, confirmed what Largoplazo and I pretty much thought, but always nice to have another opinion from (I assume) a native speaker. I've deleted it from WP:PNT. Si Trew (talk) 10:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, being a native speaker gives you quite an edge over a machine translation :D Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The parables of Peter, why was this page deleted?

I'm curious why you deleted my page, which was not a "joke edit" because the page did not exist in the first place, the poem was actually written by a friend of mine during an English lesson and is no joke, we all thought it was a very good poem and i thought it would be nice for other people to see what a wonderful poem it is. I did not offend anyone with the content on my page, because all the people mentioned in the poem were quite enthusiastic about me putting it onto Wikipedia, so next time you delete a page please ask the user who made it beforehand because i am genuinely very annoyed that you did this, this page took at least 2-3 hours to create, and now i will have to start from scratch. I was also wondering whether the text i put onto the page could be recovered, this would be nice, and also this means i won't have to start all over again, and if you need any evidence that this isn't a joke then i could provide you with the e-mail addresses of both charlie spoors and peter lane. Thank you, Mashfield. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashfield (talk • contribs) 17:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I replied on your talkpage. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, Mashfield again, im a bit stuck, im just wondering how i create a new page on my user profile? could you help please? Mashfield. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mashfield (talk • contribs) 14:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

AIV reference

With respect, as I said in the reference to AIV, I had already suggested to the editor in question that he read WP:EL. I had not given a warning, because it is meaningless for me to give a warning that I do not have the authority to act on. Kevin McE (talk) 23:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah thanks for getting back. I understand your reasoning, and that you don't want to to give off warnings you can't enforce. on the other hand, AIV is really for alerting administrators to step in, and block the user, because the means of resolving the issue for other editors are exhausted. The editor in question shouldn't be blocked at that point in time, he should be warned first. The community is all of us, not just those who happen to have a button to enforce it, and you can speak and warn for that community just as much as an administrator can. I would like to ask you to take that step next time. Still I'm glad you thought about the decision you made, instead of just blindly tagging the talkpage of the offender. Happy editing! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Dascom page

Please advise which content is written as an advertisement on this page so that I can modify. This page was added as a link from the [2] TallyGenicom entry which needed updating following the June 2009 acquisition of TallyGenicom AG by Dascom. Also, the entry for Tally. My aim is to show clearly the history of the companies involved and ensure up-to-date, factually correct information. Hopefully the modifications I made to the references are acceptable. There are further published industry articles available but as the content is similar to those listed I think it would detract from the content to list them all. Rgds, Heidi jacqueline cooper (talk) 11:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

• Uploading tool: New tool for photo scavenger hunts

• Election report: Arbitration Committee Election: Nominations closing November 24

• Fundraiser: "Wikipedia Forever" fundraiser continues

• News and notes: Government stubs, Suriname exhibit, milestones and more

• In the news: The Decline of Wikipedia, and more

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)