User talk:Amalthea/Archive 3

Le French May

why did you redo the description of le french may?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefrenchmay (talk • contribs) 15:46, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I had to remove your change of Le French May since the text you added was taken verbatim from http://www.consulfrance-hongkong.org/spip.php?article3012 and http://www.frenchmay.com/pages/about_us . However, that text is copyrighted and hasn't been released under a free license, so Wikipedia cannot accept it. If you want to change the article, please do so in your own words. You may take information from other pages, but not sentences.
Kind regards, Amalthea 15:53, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I see that you restored your change while I was writing this message. I will have to undo that again, since it is still a copyright violation. Please, do not readd it again. Amalthea 15:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

but what you have on le french may was badly written....

who are you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefrenchmay (talk • contribs) 15:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

and if i don't want to write it myself? can i put up a request saying that i want to learn more about le french may or a certain person, and someone will try to dig up more information and put it up on widipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefrenchmay (talk • contribs) 15:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, nonetheless, Wikipedia can still only accept free content. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or have a look at Wikipedia:Copyrights.
If you do not want to write original content yourself, you can try and ask nicely, for example at the WikiProject Hong Kong. However, bear in mind that this is a project written and maintained by volunteers, so there are no guarantees that your request will get a timely response. If that article is of importance to you, why not try yourself? Pick out the part that you dislike the most, and try to improve it.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

Hi, I moved the messages regarding the edits Tarheelz did to the talkpage of the article. As I'm sure you noticed, the user has a long history of making questionable edits without any sourcing. A lot of good edits, but still a fair number that aren't helping out either. Either way, if you would like to add to the discussion there, feel free.--Terrillja _talk 20:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Already did. I suggested to move it since you make a good point, and it's easier to find it there in the future.
Tarheelz, yes, I think I left him a couple of messages myself already. It's a bit sad that he is often so non-communicative, and refuses to use edit summaries. :\
Cheers, Amalthea 20:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Sir please unblock

Sir Please .I'am Editing Ajith Kumar and Asal only. Please Give me a Last chance. Please Forgive." br4011 —Preceding undated comment added 05:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC).

Please make such requests at your own talk page, using the {{unblock}} template, so that an uninvolved editor can review them. Try to address the comment left by User:Sandstein in your last attempt. And please note that continuing to edit as an IP will not help your unblock request! Amalthea 21:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

redirect comment

Who is this comment based towards? tedder (talk) 20:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

No one in particular, just an explanation of the reasoning behind the edit. Why? Amalthea 21:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Just making sure it wasn't (accidentally) aimed at me. No worries. tedder (talk) 21:11, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Alrighty. :) Amalthea 21:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Turkish people

We appreciate for your contribution regarding turkish people .Also should we inform that the pictures you are trying to replace is highly controversial.Therefore These were removed. best regards

I hear you, but you don't hear me. I've told you that the image Image:TÜRKLERR.jpg can not be used in that form since it doesn't attribute its sources, I know at least one picture from it is not in the public domain, and as such it is a copyright violation'. I have to insist that you either fix the image by properly attributing the image sources, or you replace them by the individual images placed directly in the article, similar as t how it was done before. If you don't, then you leave little option other than deleting the image, and undoing your change to the article again.
If you find the images policitally motivated and want to change that, your best course of action is to follow the rules WRT to the image, and follow my advice and add an explanation why you think so in detail at the article's talk page.
Regards, Amalthea 21:49, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Silly rabbit...

admins have acc rights by default, don't they? –xeno ^talk 13:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep.
…
Amalthea 13:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

This friendly message brought to you by the Redundancy Department of Redundancy, Redundant Division. –xeno ^talk 13:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh, nah, I didn't really know. I was thinking about creating User:AmaIthea, but that's protected by the anti-spoof protections anyway. Cheers, Amalthea 13:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

! [1] / [2] ;p –xeno ^talk 16:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

That part of the edit made perfect sense at the time, and I sure did this deliberately, but I can't for the life of me remember what I was thinking. :)
I even built a test case for age w/o bot, but I didn't check thoroughly enough if each was producing what it was supposed to I guess.
Sorry, Amalthea 17:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

No need to be sorry, let's just say it brought a perhaps too-self-satisfied grin to my face that I actually got something right over The Great Amalthea! =} –xeno ^talk 15:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

The Great? Capital G even?
That reputation is news to me, I'm pretty sure you're mixing me up with someone. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 15:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, more likely I've just missed the irony. ;) Amalthea 15:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Anyone who can figure out how to look under the hood of twinkle and fix it is Great in my eyes ! –xeno ^talk 15:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

br4011

Thanx. I will do my work Clear. br4011

Very sad that you didn't. Amalthea 11:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I just wanted to make sure it no longer showed up as active at CAT:RFU. Daniel Case (talk) 13:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Deleted text

Hello,

I recently had an article Speedily Deleted. Could you possibly send me the text of the article so that I do not have to re-create it? The article was "Americans for Educational Testing Reform".

And I do not understand why it was deleted - I would really appreciate any advice you have for me!

Thank you, Jess

Cedar96002 (talk) 21:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)cedar96002

I've restored the article in your user space, at User:Cedar96002/Americans for Educational Testing Reform. You can work on it there for now.
The reason it was deleted was that it did not say why "Americans for Educational Testing Reform" might be a notable topic. You've described the organization, but there is no indication as to why this is a notable organization that should have an encyclopedic entry here. A quick search of my own on Google News, Google Scholar, or Google Books didn't turn anything up just now either.
What you need to do before the article can be moved back into article space, where it can be found by our readers, is to "establish notability". This is most easily done by adding a few independent reliable sources, like newspapers, that have discussed the topic in-depth. If there is no such news coverage of a contemporary topic then usually such an article would be deleted even if it were discussed by a broader group here, and not speedily deleted. User Ironholds left a couple of links on your user page along with his message, I would suggest you have at least a look at Your first article for some more information. For more detailed information about the notability guideline of cooperations, you can also have a look at WP:Notability (organizations and companies).
If you can find some good reliable references about the topic, or if there's anything else you can help you with, feel free to get back to me.
Kind regards, Amalthea 22:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

For you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Although I know that you are not collecting barnstars — thanks for handling my talk page while I was on vacation! SoWhy 11:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh, thanks, but I exaggerated a little, I really only answered to one query, and left whatever needs to be done with those homicide articles to you. :)
Oh, and I noticed the script request talkback you got, and realized that it's somewhat connected to the CSD decline script. Is that something that should be worked into that eventually as well, notifying the users? FWIW, I started with the script last weekend, but I'd like to do some groundwork first, and not just make it into a Twinkle module; Twinkle has severe problems with code reuse and error handling and robustness in general, so I decided to start from scratch instead. Also, Dan asked for a "decline speedy and turn it into a PROD" at WT:TW#Downgrading speedy to prod-nn; This sounds like it would fit in as well, but I'm not sure yet how to organize it interface-wise, so that it's still easy to decline your everyday not-an-A7 without having to jump through any hoops. Long story short, I'm working on it. :) Amalthea 12:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Even one query is better than none :-)

Ah, yes. I made the request was back in December, before I even thought about the decline script. So yes, it would probably fit in with the decline script pretty neatly (like a "decline (reason) and notify tagger (reason)"-button), as would Dan's suggestion to downgrade stuff to PRODs (if people used {{db|reason}}, it could just turn it into {{subst:prod|reason}}, I think), so if you manage to built such stuff in, it would probably become the most useful tool for a CSD patrolling admin yet. But I let you decide which features you think you can add, great to see that you work on it though. Have "fun" ;-) Regards SoWhy 12:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Turkish People

your persistant vandalism and lack of knowledge will be warned thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilybaeum (talk • contribs) 16:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Br4011

I'm not certain that the user's comprehension of English is good enough to understand what you're telling them, so I'm trying a more direct approach. (Note my questions under the latest unblock request.) I'm not really expecting a breakthrough here, but I felt compelled to try something. Cheers —Travis^talk 13:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, do whatever you can! I find it hard to believe that he didn't pick up that something was wrong with his image uploads after the countless warnings he got before the block though, and the fact that all his images kept being deleted, even if he didn't understand the messages. As I said though, I of course don't mind an unblock if you're reasonably convinced that he won't do it again. Having tried an unblock once though, I don't want to risk being fooled twice without a much clearer admission from him of what he's done wrong, and why. Amalthea 13:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI: [3] Needless to say, I'll be keeping a very close eye on the logs and contributions. —Travis^talk 15:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

This user's talk page goes to User talk:Esasus, who was indefinitely blocked as a sock of Azviz (talk · contribs). Something is not right, as I have already noted in the corresponding ANI post. MuZemike 19:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, MuZ. I've posted the most probable explanation for this at ANI. Cheers, Amalthea 19:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Images

Hi, I ran across a whole bunch of images uploaded by JoshuaBrody (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) under licenses which are obviously incorrect. I tagged some as f9 where I could find the original source, but others were sourced to wordpress blogs, and I have no idea of the copyright status there. Even if they are not copyvios that those writers pulled and posted on their blogs, the licenses are invalid. Just looking for some advice on how to go about dealing with these, as images are not an area which I regularly deal with. Thanks, --Terrillja _talk 18:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi
OK, I tok care of it. In theory, all could have been deleted as F9 unambiguous copyright violations, since he claimed to hold copyright, but obviously doesn't (pretty much as it also says at the top of WP:PUI). However, the two album front covers can be kept under fair use – for now, at least, since the two album articles probably won't pass WP:MUSIC, from the looks of it. They'll also have to be scaled down, and the high res revision needs to be deleted, but I've got to run now, so I only tagged them accordingly.
Thanks! Amalthea 18:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles with topics of unclear notability Graph

I just spotted your posting from a few months ago. The graph looks great! I'd say "implement". Thanks! --Stormbay (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh my, has that been four months already?
I have to fix one remaining issue with it (the number of months to show isn't automatically detected yet), but I guess I'll just do it then and move it to the category page afterwards. :)
It will probably take me a couple of days though.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll be watching for it! --Stormbay (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Jessica Jacobs

Hi

I've done some more work on it in the last few weeks - at least that over zealous Saddle Club fan seems to have disappeared, thank goodness. Paul Austin (talk) 20:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

That's good, but all of the inline sources were apparently lost in her last editing spree. I'll have a look at the article, but only after the holidays.
Cheers, Amalthea 12:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for a Picture to Ajit's Page

Amathea Sir, Thanx for ur Work. I'll do my Work Clear. Sir, in Ajit's page dont have Ajit's Picture. I talled u before even. What is the idea to put picture into it. Without asking u i'll not do anything. --Br4011 (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2009

Unless you can personally take a picture of him, or you know of some picture that was explicitly released under a free license, then the article cannot have a picture at the moment.
If you want to keep looking for free pictures, then a good place might be Flickr; Every image there has a clear license attached, and some are licensed as e.g. "CC-by-SA 3.0", which is a free license compatible with Wikipedia. If you think you have found a free image check back with me first though!
Also, in the future, you should add new talk page sections at the bottom, not at the top. And stop calling me Sir. :) Amalthea 09:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

What's the meaning of free image. we must take in google images, where we can take. I can't understand. Shall i send you a Picture.
Br4011 (talk) 08:21, 23 May 2009

When I said you can personally "take" an image, I meant you have to meet him, with your camera, and shoot one for yourself. Not take one from google images.
"Free image" means that the person who shot the picture must either release it into the public domain (by explicitly saying so) or license it under a free license, typically one listed at WP:ICT/FL. You can try looking for such an image at google images, but chances to find one are rather slim. As I said, I expect that the article will not have an image at the moment since no free picture is available.
Nonetheless, the Finding images tutorial might be interesting for you.
For example: File:Circus 09.jpg can be used here because the copyright owner uploaded it to flickr and released it there under CC-BY (linked behind the "some rights reserved"), which is acceptable here. Amalthea 08:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is the Picture. Can I upload it. In flikr Thala_Ajith Profile have 2 Pictures Can I upload it, For Ajit kumar Profile. I'll not do anything without asking you.
Br4011 (talk) 15:46, 23 May 2009

No, since both images are marked with "All rights reserved", meaning they didn't license it under a free license. Amalthea 10:47, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Now see the 2 Pictures. it has Licesed under a free license. Br4011 (talk) 16:46, 23 May 2009

Hold on a second, is that your flickr account? I thought that was Ajith Kumar's of course.
Both pictures were previously published elsewhere, and I see no indication that the owner of the flickr account holds copyright, so he can't release it under a free license in the first place. In fact, both pictures there are already a copyright violation. If that's your account, you need to remove the pictures again, and please stop looking for ways around copyright law and copyright policies here on Wikipedia! If you can't take a picture yourself, just give it up and wait until someone can. Amalthea 11:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, please have a look at WP:SIGN#Preferred option. It will automatically insert a signature, doing it manually is not necessary, and your manual timestamps are from the wrong timezone. Just type ~~~~ or press the button in the toolbar instead. Amalthea 11:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes that is My Flickr Account. I'am a big fan of Ajith kumar. Meeting im is impossible. But Joseph Vijay fans are puting pictures in there Page. Ajith kumar Page must be better than Joseph Vijay. I'am Waiting for your reply. Please tell me a Idea.
Br4011 15:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't care about that. And there is no other way. Read what I said above again: The copyright owner must release it under a free license. If you take it from somewhere on the web and upload it to flickr, then you are not the copyright owner.
This is the last word on this. It is clear that you do not understand copyright, and you do not want to read up on it yourself. Do not upload another image, and do not try to get any other image you find on the web to appear in the article. Since you are not willing to educate yourself and contribute according to our policies I can not and will not help you any longer. Amalthea 15:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

← Amalthea. I got this kind of image in Another website. This is a Free Image. Click to see. Can u tell can i upload it.Br4011 04:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Why do you think it is a free image? Amalthea 08:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't no about that. I sawed today this picture in asal the movie it tiled free image. and copyright owner realsed it has free. Br4011 15:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

You say "This is a Free Image", "it tiled free image", and "copyright owner realsed it has free". My question is: Where does it say any of that? I don't see it on the URL you gave me.
I assume that Ajith Kumar actually owns copyright, but it's hard to say since it has been used on many sites. If Kumar doesn't explicitly release this image under a free license either on his official website or in an email from a domain that can be proven is his, then forget about this image. It can't be used, no matter if you find it listed on another dozen sites. Amalthea 15:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit notice about British English style guide for Tomb Raider articles

Hey thanks for previously adding an edit notice on the Lara Croft article. Its helped stop massive amounts of pointless edits. I was wondering if you could do the same for the rest of the tomb raider articles? I find myself having to undo language edits multiple times on tomb raider articles. These are the articles I am talking about:

• Tomb Raider
• Tomb Raider II
• Tomb Raider III
• Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation
• Tomb Raider Chronicles
• Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness
• Tomb Raider: Legend
• Tomb Raider: Anniversary
• Tomb Raider: Underworld

Thanks :) Neu_tralle 13:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi
As I said previously, I'd be willing if anyone can point me to an (implicit or explicit) consensus to use British English in an article, and where the article has a history of that spelling being "corrected". I'd rather not use edit notices inflationary, but only where there is a recurring problem. If overused, editors will soon extend their banner blindness to them.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Chiranth's Cookies

Amalthea please save the new page Chiranth's Coookies, my school friend made the page and it was meant to be a joke. He also created Chranth's Magic Show as a joke for other schoolmates, Chiranth and Omar, I have edited these pages to try to make them even better to laugh at. Vermin2 (talk) 03:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, not exactly what we're trying to do here. Amalthea 08:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Sara Paxton

Sorry, yes, that was a mistake. I thought I was doing the opposite of what I was doing. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, that happens. :) Cheers, Amalthea 14:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

re: RussBot help, Thank you Amalthea, I got a note on my mistakes when I woke up this morning, sure wasn't the way I wanted to start out the day. I appreciate your help in fixing my goofs. — Ched :  ?  13:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Didn't need to do anything, it has already been found and fixed by the bot. Category:Living People was a category redirect for some time, and RussBot is monitoring all entries in those. Cheers, Amalthea 14:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm very touched!

Thanks for the comment on my talk page! I'm very touched that you think highly enough of me to leave me such a comment.

The truth is that a couple of days ago, I got involved in a little splat with another user (User:Jeneral28), which escalated to the point that a page we disagreed on was temporarily protected. The user has since become much harder to work with; any edit I or other editors make to a page, the user just reverts without a second thought. On the page that was protected, I still strongly feel I was correct in my position, but decided arguing the point further would be fruitless and simply walked away from the conflict and asked the protecting admin to unprotect the page. I was flustered after the conflict, though, and decided to slow down my editing. Then I thought about leaving the project completely, so I requested my user page to be speedy deleted two days ago.

Then I got this message and it really made my day. With such great, professional, personable, and thoughtful users on Wikipedia like you, it made me realize that I shouldn't let the rude ones like Jeneral28 make me stop editing. So in short, I don't think I would ever be able to completely stop editing Wikipedia completely. Thank you again for your message, I can't express how much better it made me feel. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 05:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeneral28? Who has "I hate guidelines" on his user page, and used to display "I HATE WIKIPEDIA EDITORS" there, and who's currently blocked? It would be a real shame if he'd manage to drive away anybody! But yeah, I know the feeling anyway. Sometimes, leaving an issue for someone else and removing a page from one's watchlist is the only way to stay sane here. What I've been doing lately when I know I'm right, but am dealing with a particularly stubborn editor who hasn't heard of WP:BRD or doesn't discuss or listen to reason at all is to drop a neutral note about the dispute at one or two appropriate WikiProject talk pages. That'll get the attention of a few editors who can affirm consensus and, if needed, help enforcing it. It's usually faster then trying WP:3O.
Anyway, glad that you're still here. If you want your user page back, just ask. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 13:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point! But I think Jeneral28 may have been one of the reasons why we just lost User:Frehley.

In any case, thanks for the advice. I'll look up the appropriate WikiProjects to post to should this problem continue.

(Also, I appreciate the offer regarding my user page! I'm not sure if I want it back yet, and I saved a copy in my sandbox just in case, but I'll let you know if I decide I want it back.) 青い(Aoi) (talk) 08:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeneral28 and IP 147.188.244.59

Hi Amalthea. Thank you again for your kind words above. I noticed you reverted an edit by IP user 147.188.244.59 on the About You Now page. I have actually had this user on my watchlist for about a month now and I'm fairly convinced that this is really Jeneral28 evading his/her block. Looking at the IP user's, with the exception of the edits from 2007, every single edit by the IP user has been a page that Jeneral28 has edited (with the exception of this edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_characters_from_iCarly&diff=prev&oldid=292839822, which was pretty much just a taunt. I'm not sure if WP:SPI is appropriate here; I'm unfamiliar with this specific process. I'm guessing a high degree of evidence is required and I'm not sure if the evidence exists in this case. What do you think? 青い(Aoi) (talk) 08:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm already checking this, and am fairly convinced it's the same user, per WP:DUCK. Will get back in a couple of minutes. Amalthea 08:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for 31 hours, and reset the block of Jeneral28. That was blatantly obvious socking. Amalthea 09:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response and letting me know about WP:DUCK. The illustration and corresponding caption on the page made my day! 青い(Aoi) (talk) 09:10, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you check some Friendly changes I made?

Could you check me on some changes I made to Friendly?

• User:Ioeth/friendlywelcome.js (diff)
• User:Ioeth/friendlytag.js (diff)

In both cases, I believe I did it right, but it seems to not be showing up after (A) clearing my Firefox cache, and (B) looking for the results in Safari.

So if you could check me, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:38, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Checked, and works again. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 06:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:25, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Nell Irvin Painter

Thanks for spotting and removing the copyvio. I suspected it (see the template I added to the talk page) but didn't know where it came from. I must have added the unreferenced template just after you deleted the old revisions; I was just about to rollback my own edit, when you got there first. Good job. :) Robofish (talk) 06:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. I only looked for it cause you added the tag to the talk page. :) Cheers, Amalthea 06:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

File:TÜRKLERR.jpg

Hi Amalthea, Regarding this file you've tagged as {{di-dw no source}}, I noticed that it didn't have {{deletable image-caption}} on the Turkish people article where it's used, so I've added that and reset the speedy deletion deadline for correction of the missing source info. to 5 June. Regards,  JGHowes  ^talk 04:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Fine by me. I did notify the author though, who refused, and there's a note on the talk page since May 24. Thanks, Amalthea 08:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that, which is why I wanted to dot every "i" and cross every "t", procedurally speaking, before speedying it, given the contentiousness and edit warring, in case it winds up at DRV. Anyway, thx for your patience and understanding.  JGHowes  ^talk 15:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Best I can tell CSD F4 is satisfied with tagging it and putting it into the right category; tagging image uses in the articles is more like drawing pretty hearts instead of dots on the "i"s. :)
But, as I said, I don't mind of course. I have no opinion on the image per se, but it eventually needs to be done properly or not be here at all.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 16:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

It's on my watchlist and at the top of my tickler file for 5 June to delete, unless it's.corrected properly before then.  JGHowes  ^talk 16:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you review a new entry?

Dear Amalthea, About 6 months ago, you were very helpful as I developed my first article. I have written a draft of a new article, but it has been a while and I want to make sure that it's ok. I also am uncertain how to move the article from my talk page to live Wikipedia. I believe that I need to do it through the "move" tab, but since my talk page also contains old conversation on other topics, I'm not sure if that will go public too. Can you take a look when you have a moment? It's the Franciscan Center of Baltimore. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks, Debbie Debbie (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a more closer look later and will get back to you. From a glance, when I read the lead section, I was wondering why this was a notable organization. I see that you've included two references to decent newspaper articles about it, so I guess it might pass our criteria, but I would try to add some fact into the lead section that hints at the size of the organization or something, to communicate to the reader why this organization is special. That's important, there are many charity organizations of all kinds and sizes around the world, what makes this one important enough to have an encyclopaedic article? (And if it isn't, be prepared that another editor might propose it for deletion:))

Then, I'd remove the two sections "More Information" and "The Prayer of St. Francis". I don't see that this is particularly encyclopedic information, the detailed contact information can be found at their website, if it's also in the article it gives it the look of an advertising. Check out other articles about similar organizations, it always helps to get a feeling for what's the norm.

Also, I'd try to convert the services section from the current, list-like format into prose, and possibly shorten it a little. It's not really necessary to go into detail here and say at which days a hot meal is given out, only that they provide meals, in my opinion.

Since you've started the article on your talk page, you'll simply have to copy&paste it to it's final location, Franciscan Center of Baltimore. That's OK in this case since only you worked on it. As you suspected, if you use the "move" function then all the rest of your talk page, along with the history of all conversations, will be moved as well. If you had started it at e.g. User:DebbieFeldmanJones/Sandbox, you could have used the "move" tab, maybe try that with your next article.
I'll keep an eye on it! Cheers, Amalthea 14:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I like the new services section better now! The article is still not really saying why this is an organization of encyclopedic notability though. If you can find anything on that you should add it, otherwise I'd say just copy it to mainspace and see what others say. The articles in the (as far as I can tell) regional newspapers might be enough. Amalthea 16:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much. You suggested that I copy it to main space. On Wikipedia, I've seen a lot of reference on content (how to write an article) but not technically how to create an article on the main space. Sorry for the stupid question, but can you tell me how or suggest where I can find the info? ... BTW, I have found the reference to support its significance as the first congregation of white sisters to serve the black community in Baltimore (possibly in the nation -- I'm still trying to confirm that) that), starting in 1881-- in a 1930 book, "The Catholic Church and the American Negro," found in the Maryland State Library archives. I think this will strengthen proof that the organization is of historical significance. Debbie (talk) 18:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

If you type the name of your article into the search box and hit "Go", it will report back that no such article was found, and will display a red link that says "Create this article". If you click that, it leads you to a normal edit form, just like when you edit an existing article. If you first go to your talk page and copy the source of your new article, you can then paste it there.
Assuming that you want it called Franciscan Center of Baltimore you can also just click on this red link (links are colored red if the article doesn't exist yet).
And good job on finding the additional reference! I agree that this makes the center appear much more significant if the organization (or the community it came from) was mentioned that early.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

hey

so on "paris hilton the singer": thanks for the definition. and you know what? you'r right to apply the defintion. her music is not so much worse than other unexceptional pop music over the years so as to say she is not in fact, someone who sings. to say nothing of this type of poetry:

I can make you nice and naughty
Be the devil and angel too
Got a heart and soul and body
Let's see what this love can do
Baby i'm perfect for you

here's the thing. who cares, in this instance whether wikipedia does not slam her for... never mind. you'r right. sorry.

HeadsCanBeLargelyAkin2Wholes 14:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I can't even give an opinion about the quality of her music, I don't remember ever having heard one of her songs. Or more likely I heard one and, as you say, it just blended in with the rest of the unexceptional stuff.
Anyway, thanks for getting back, and not labeling me a propagandist again. :) Cheers, Amalthea 14:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Image licenses

Actually, I upload images not minding copyright licenses and they end up being deleted. I really don't know much of what license goes for what kinds of pictures, except for ones that I may have made myself. I guess I'll have to stop uploading pictures I find and rather take pictures myself for the sake of ease. Eelam StyleZ ^(talk) 19:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd say so, yes, and if you do but don't know the license, just say so on the upload form and don't use the "I own copyright of this image" option. By default, no image you just find on the net can be used on Wikipedia, unless it was released under a free license by the copyright holder, or it fits our very narrow claim of fair use.
I think it's cleaned up now, but you should be prepared that the fair-use film screenshots will eventually be deleted as well, since it's rather hard for screenshots to properly pass WP:NFCC, and it appears that they are only used for decoration.
Thanks for thinking about it, Amalthea 19:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome, and thanks for the images. I got some images I took myself. The ones you sent me, I'll try sticking them in the Tamil protests articles, if the articles are finally allowed to be kept. Eelam StyleZ (talk) 00:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Steinbeck stamp discussion

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at Ww2censor's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ww2censor (talk) 17:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

For your amusement

Here's something to brighten your day! Apparently, we posted comments on a Miranda Cosgrove video at popdirt.com happily admitting that Miranda Cosgrove lip-syncs. =)

Also, the video was posted as a ref at lip-synching in music and lip sync by 81.23.56.9, which was previously blocked as a sock of Jeneral28.

(See also Special:Contributions/Foxhound66) 青い(Aoi) (talk) 18:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hahaha ... well, that's new. :) Amalthea 21:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, undid those unreliable references, and reblocked the IP for block evasion. From the video it is fairly obvious that this one performance is lipsynched, but there has to be a WP:RS out there on this. Foxhound66 is a possible match, I agree, but has behaved himself so far I'd say. If he lets the other issues go and doesn't start edit warring somewhere else I'd tend to leave that one be (cause really, he'll just create a new one). Amalthea 21:47, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Your work as a Wikipedia editor

I have been under the impression that all editors are volunteers. You are so knowledgeable and put so much time into Wikipedia that it makes me wonder if you are on staff at Wikipedia -- is there such a thing as paid editors? Debbie (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Only on the software developing side, and I'm guessing that there are editors out there who get paid for writing favorable articles on companies. But mostly, people just see this is a hobby or as a voluntary, altruistic activity. And there are people who spend far more time here than I do. :) Amalthea 21:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

My Tamil pics

You, rather rudely I thought, commented on my pictures of the Tamil protests in London. I liked, though, the idea you add to your insult that it 'cannot be helped'. Well it can. Get a camera and take your own photographs. I licence my photos as a gift. I welcome criticism. But not of this sort. Please regard all of my pictures as copyrighted no use by you Steve Punter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.120.17 (talk) 07:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello Steve.
I believe there has been a misunderstanding, it was in no way my intention to insult you. My comment was based on my opinion that this picture was pretty much the perfect picture for the sidebox Template:Tamil protests, with the big red Tamil flag, and the sea of blurred flags in the background. With "it cannot be helped" I only wanted to make clear that this image cannot be used since it is not released under a free license – we can't use it, and that can't be helped. Yours can be used, and I am grateful that you do offer your images licensed under CC-by-sa. I did like your images, which is why I proposed five of them to Eelamstylez77 as replacements. English isn't my first language, so I'm afraid I often don't express myself clear enough.
Kind regards, Amalthea 10:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

regarding twinkleimage

I saw you where using rn, but I changed it to n, hoe it is ok with you. We are not using windows here :) _→AzaToth 12:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course! I never thought about which EOL style wikitext uses, and was automatically going with HTTP convention. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 17:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Deleted FAC

Hi, I just restored Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/West Bengal. I noticed you've been clearing up redirects but here you seemed to delete a whole FAC which doesn't seem to have an archive anywhere else. Should this be moved to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/West Bengal/archive2 or are old successful FACs just left where they are. Also if I did anything wrong please say as I'm new at all this. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the transclusions in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/November 2006 I'm guessing it currently is the latter, but might as well double check. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I believe it's /archive2. I've checked back with Maralia, will let them move it, and will take care of the redirect then. I deleted those pages on her behalf, but I guess I should have double checked them all before deleting. It's surprising that there were any left with the old archiving system, a bot was supposed to move them all.
Thanks, Amalthea 15:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for Db-c1

Hi there Amalthea I don't want to bug you, but I just realised that I took part in the linked conversation a little late (a week after the last post was methinks). If you could take a look whenever you have tie (no rush), that would be appreciated. Basically I just need to know if it's a suitable task for a bot and I also need the task to be outlined more clearly. Cheers - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, replied there, thanks. Amalthea 12:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

RfC Proposal for Twinkle

Continuing the username policy RfC, I have proposed something that would likely create more than trivial (but nothing elaborate either) work for Twinkle devs, so I thought I'd let you weigh in on it. Please post if there are any concerns you see. Also let anyone else that might be affected know about it. Wikipedia_talk:Username_policy/Blatant_Promotion_RfC#Proposal_5_--_Reflect_consensus_in_twinkle_and_templates Gigs (talk) 02:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

batch history merge

how DARE you craft your edit notice to call me by name! i was startled!

now, onto the business at hand: Wikipedia:AN#Admins with history merging experience wanted. any possibility of crafting some of that "batch history merging" functionality we spoke about a while back into Twinkle? I think it might be helpful in this monumental task. –xeno^talk 06:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Creepy, isn't it? And I guess you haven't been to User:Amalthea/test16 yet? Bugzilla:19006 will remove that functionality.
Concerning business, could you refresh my memory where we talked about this? I only remember User talk:Amalthea/Archive 2#Twinkle and preventing it automatically deleting redirects.
Cheers, Amalthea 06:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, we never really did speak about it beyond that conversation. I think I must have "thought" about it , but then never actually brought it up to you ;p –xeno^talk 11:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright. Well, feel free to specify your idea here or at WT:RFA, or at WP:Scripting requests or WT:WikiProject User scripts for that matter. Or were you only thinking about a helper script for trivial histmerges where the complete history can be moved, there's no overlap, and no deleted revisions to take care of? E.g., a move & full restore?
I personally can't say right now when I could get around to anything bigger however, I'm quite pressed for time right now (and for the next couple of months as well, from the looks of it). :\
Amalthea 13:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, very simple history merge automation would be enough for now, i.e. move old page on top of the new page, restore all the deleted revisions , and revert to the most recent good version. –xeno^talk 13:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The revert can be skipped, if the page comes from that list then neither page will have been tagged with {{db-histmerge}}. Amalthea 14:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, good point. –xeno^talk 14:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I was just about to say that considering the number of cases Mikaey already collected (after checking only 6%) it warrants an automated process to thin the list, but I saw Anthony already mentioned it at AN. You should definitely turn this into a WP:BOTREQ, I'm certain that someone there will be happy to write a bot for the easy cases. There are many cases where the last (non-redirect) revision of the source is the same as the first revision of the destination, in particluar all those old mainspace subpages, like Bolivia/Communications for example. Clearing out those before people start chipping at the remaining cases will help a lot. Amalthea 14:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

You're probably right about a bot giving it the initial heave-ho. However, a simple history merge script would help me in my regular day-to-day. –xeno^talk 14:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I hear you. But I really can't promise anything at all. If you find someone else to start a script, you should probably ask them. :\ Amalthea 14:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem! I'll poke around. –xeno^talk 18:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

EditNotice template

Hi Amalthea. I just want to let you now that I found your EditNotice template quite impressive. I've copied your template to my talk page, I've just made a few modifications. Kind regards, LouriePieterse (talk) 12:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, glad you liked it. Amalthea 18:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

{{italictitle}}

Thanks for taking care of that, and also for the note about using {{editprotected}} in the future. I'll try to remember that. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, thanks for the fix. Amalthea 18:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Bing

On June 1. Bing was introduced. And i want to remove Bing.Can you please help me get no Bing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent camp (talk • contribs) 17:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're asking. Remove from where? Amalthea 18:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Could i Ban my account? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent camp (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

What does that mean? If you don't want to use your account anymore, just don't use it. Amalthea 19:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent camp (talk • contribs) 19:28, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

What do you want to accomplish? Amalthea 19:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I need User boxes because i don't have one.How can i put user boxes?--Brent camp (talk) 20:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

You need to work on your communication skills, friend. You've asked a number of questions, I've asked questions back, but you never followed up on them. Have you figured out what you want to know already? If you are looking for a general introduction into Wikipedia, you should follow the links left on your talk page, or maybe have a look at Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. In general, if you're looking for help on a specific topic, like userboxes, just type "Help:Userbox" into the search box and press Go.
Amalthea 06:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Help:Userbox —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brent camp (talk • contribs) 13:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

With "search box" I referred to the input field in the left column, below the logo in the top left corner. Amalthea 14:05, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Chris Brown

I need an immediate pair of eyes on Chris Brown. I believe User:UweBayern is using criminal convictions on Chris Brown inapporiatly to make a soapbox case as seen here. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I've watchlisted it, and will check back. Thanks, Amalthea 00:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I've opened up a request for comment here: Talk:Chris_Brown_(entertainer)#WP:NPOV_and_criminal_conviction. Would you mind giving your two cents? Thankyou. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Due to severe lack of time I'm currently not the best person to approach for immediate feedback, sorry. From what I can see consensus is already pretty apparent, so I'll hold of commenting for now. I'll continue to keep it on my watchlist, for whatever that's currently worth. :\
Cheers, Amalthea 10:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle suggestion

Getting back to my suggestion earlier, would it be possible to make Twinkle automatically not warn the article creator if the creator hasn't edited in a certain amount of time (like, 6 months or so)? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that would make more sense. I'm not sure it's really that important and it will require one additional HTTP request and will thus slow tagging down a little, so I've asked for some more input at WT:TW. If others want that feature as well I'll add it. Amalthea 10:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Scuts

Regarding the shortcuts, yes, I am particularly attached to them. They give me and others quick navigation and others over the years have complained about not being able to remember how to punctuate my username/case sensitive my username. Per WP:CROSS, Currently, the general consensus seems to be that.. ..Pseudo-namespace redirects (CAT:, P:, MOS:, etc) may freely be used - freely the keyword there. Per Wikipedia:Pseudo-namespace#Pseudo-namespaces, those are pseudo-namespace. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 19:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For this notification. Sorry for not acknowledging you earlier, I can assure you I wasn't ignoring you! Acalamari 21:12, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries, that didn't really require acknowledgment anyway. :) Cheers, Amalthea 18:08, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

WT:AF#Tags look like edit summaries sometimes

Can you see my most recent comment there (bottom of thread) and advise? –xeno^talk 15:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I've answered there.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

A question about Twinkle

Hi Amalthea. Sorry for the disturbance but I would like to find out what the button "Unlink" does. It is the one next to the xfd button on the Twinkle interface. Its pop up description says "Unlink backlinks". Does that mean that when you press it the mediawiki software unlinks all incoming lins to the article? If so why would anyone want to do that? Thanks. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 16:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

BTW this button is not covered in the documentation. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 16:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

Well, Twinkle, not MediaWiki, but essentially yes: it removes all links (and image usages) in all mainspace and portal space pages to to the current pages. Automatic unlinking is mostly used after deletion of pages that have been found non-notable, i.e. where it's unlikely that we ever want to have a page on that topic, and where we consequently don't want any redlinks to that title. The unlink function allows selective removal of all those links.
HTH, I'd recommend asking Twinkle-related questions at WT:TW in the future. Amalthea 20:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for the details. Also sorry for loading your page with TW related questions but I saw your reply here and I thought I would bypass the talkpage. Obviously it was the wrong thought. Thanks again. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 21:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

No worries! It just makes sense to keep the information at the tool's talk page and in the archives for future reference, and it's usually more likely to get a timely response there since I'm currently not as active on Wikipedia as I used to be. I of course don't mind being asked questions here, that's what this page is for. Cheers, Amalthea 21:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

On retrospect I agree. It would have been more useful to include the question on the project page where it would be more visible and thus more useful to others. Thanks for your patience Amalthea. Cheers. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 00:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC))

Talkback

Hello, Amalthea. You have new messages at Steve Crossin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 20:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied again. Best, Steve Crossin ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Just because...

		The Special Barnstar
		guess you'll need it :) →AzaToth 18:20, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, is there any way I can interpret this as "Thanks for keeping an eye on Twinkle, but I suddenly have lots of time again and will take it from here"? :)
No? Oh well. Thanks anyway, though!
Cheers, Amalthea 09:34, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW: WP:TW/BUG#305. Oh-oh, that'll be fun. Amalthea 12:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ajith Kumar

Hello,

I undid a string of what I presume were well meaning edits made to Ajith Kumar by an anonymous editor. I have no knowledge of the subject matter I just noticed that the edits appeared to have mangled the page and I restored to what I discerned to be the last 'good' version of the article. I hope I didn't remove anything important. Teh Crafty One (talk) 23:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, you did fine, I would have made the same edit. Since the heritage of the father seems to be disputed by the anonymous user I just went back to the reference and went with the more specialized term from the source. Cheers, Amalthea 23:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, I just didn't want to bugger anything up. Thanks, Teh Crafty One (talk) 23:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

{{RfA}}

Thanks for this, I don't know what happened there. :) — neuro^(talk) 10:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries! :) Amalthea 20:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to the Ajit Kumar article

I just happened to have that page on my watchlist, and saw that you preferred addressing him by his last name. Kumar is not his last name (though I'm not sure what his last name is, if any). Kumar is a generic-sort-of appendage (I'll leave it at that for brevity) to Indian first names that has nothing to do with the family name. It is part of the given name. Just an FYI. Anyway standardizing Indian names is a whole different beast that I hope to address some time. Cheers. Cribananda (talk) 01:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright, thanks, I've reverted myself.
For something related, could have a look at the talk page of that article and weigh in on the issue of the father, if you have time?
Thanks, Amalthea 08:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I listened to the interview clip. Palakkad Iyer, I agree is the best description, and seems consistent. Though their native-language is Tamil, they are also Keralites. Cribananda (talk) 18:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Hi there Amalthea. Could you please comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Add noindex tag to CSD G10 template? TIA SoWhy 22:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep. Cheers, Amalthea 11:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Amalthea2

Hi, sorry to bother you but this would appear to be a mistake (as you could just delete it yourself)? It is showing up here and I'm trying to clear it out. Apologies if I am wrong, regards ascidian | talk-to-me 19:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, yeah, a Twinkle test I forgot to clean up. Sorry, Amalthea 19:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Old revision header changes

Quick response, kudos to you! Have a good time, FHessel (talk) 12:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, thanks. Amalthea 10:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Imbox deletion.png

Sure I would be glad to help! Since IE is the standard browser for my employer, I do not often have the opportunity to use Twinkle. However while processing speedy image deletion requests at home today, I switched over to FireFox so that I could use Twinkle because I remembered that it had an image un-link tool that I had used a couple of months ago when deleting images. However I either mis-remembered how to use that feature or mis-clicked, because instead of removing instances of the image in question, I made it delete deletion.png (ooops). After an ID-Ten-T Error like that, I figured it would be best if I switched back to IE and started doing things the old fashioned way. Please let me know if you have any other questions or issues. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I had hoped that the "batch" in the title would be enough to make people realize that the tool is supposed for batch deletion of images - the "csd" tab is for deletion of single items. I guess I have to do some more work there then. Cheers, Amalthea 10:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks from all of us

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You are everywhere, you are quick to respond, you are helpful, and you are on here some ridiculous amount of time. No matter what hour I login you are always near the top of my watchlist fixing something. Thank you for all that you do.    7   talk | Δ |   07:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

You quite certainly have the wrong pages watchlisted. :) Amalthea 09:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedian of the Day

Congratulations, Amalthea! For your kindness to others, your hard work around the wiki, and for being a great user, you have been awarded the "Wikipedian of the Day" award for today, July 24, 2009! Keep up the great work!
Note: You could also receive the "Wikipedian of the Week award for this week!

Happy editing!

[midnight comet] [talk] 02:12, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Happy Twinkling, Amalthea 09:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Editnote edit - note

Thanks for that. I saw the "deleted page" notice following a page move, but I wasn't going to touch any of that stuff - I'm too worried about breakign things! Cheers, Tonywalton ^Talk 15:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I actually should have fixed that when I moved it at the time. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 19:01, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Commented out timestamps

Thanks for this. Do commented out timestamps get picked up by archival bots? If so, I'll have to remember that trick! Oh, and your edit notice has my name in there! First time I've seen that! Which magic word is that? Carcharoth (talk) 00:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, at least by MiszaBot, but I assume by others as well. That can be useful if you don't want a section archived: Just add a fake-sig in a comment with a timestamp way in the future. The problem with sigs in comments is that tildes or substed templates won't work there, so you either have to place it manually, or mabe use something like {{void|~~~~}}. Or just sign the announcements normally, really, if there is no good reason not to.:)
And concerning the editnotice, heh, yes, that feature will hopefully be disabled soon, see bugzilla:19006. It has its uses (also of a more serious nature), but since we allow all users to have editnotices and the trick works there it has potential for abuse.
Cheers, Amalthea 08:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Missing

Amalthea, please don't blow this into something worse. I am trying VERY hard to reference and sort out those that were created, I do not need drawing up lists to delete when I am trying to expand asap. It is just not fair on me. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you understand that I'm under a lot of pressure right now, I would rather you didn't make it worse for me by letting everybody know. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 15:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I've also replied at User talk:Jennavecia#My apologies, let's try to keep at least that part of the discussion in one place.
As mentioned there, this shouldn't be putting any pressure on you, there is no prejudice against recreation of the articles, and since they didn't really contain any information found outside the respective List of German $PARTY politicians it's trivial to recreate any one of them if one intends to start them properly, with at least some useful information and basic sourcing.
It's not like that wouldn't have been possible, there are registers available that could be used to create stubs with sourced birth dates, possibly the picture taken from the :de article if available, a proper infobox, ...
Amalthea 15:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

More stubs

It seems there are about 300 more that were generated with AWB, as well as 1,000(?) manually-created ones. Would you like me to list the rest? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm going to let the remaining articles sit for awhile, to give Dr. Blofeld a chance to sort through them. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:23, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

As I told Blofeld, I'm happy if I know that someone is taking care of them in a timely manner. Cheers, Amalthea 17:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

Hey, sorry I didn't see your second last message which is why I didn't reply. Also sorry for uploading the actor images claiming it to be mine. I was going to search for the correct copyright tag and place it later. Also the montage, that was a mistake. I didn't know the pictures I used also counted... Eelam StyleZ (talk) 22:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I can understand the montage, but you really should know better about images you find somewhere on the web by now. There is no correct copyright tag for those unless you believe they can be used under the very very narrow fair use criteria, which practically never apply for living persons. If you didn't take the picture yourself and if the image source doesn't explicitly release it under a free license, don't upload it. And in no case should you claim you own copyright if you don't. Again, I thought you understood this when the last half dozen of your uploads had to be cleaned up and we talked about the exact same thing. Amalthea 08:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject TRANSWIKI

Hi. In light of recent events and community concerns about the way in which content is transferred I have proposed a new wikiproject which would attempt to address any of the concerns and done in an environment where a major group of editors work together to transfer articles from other wikipedias in the most effective way possible without BLP or referencing problems. Please offer your thoughts at the proposal and whether or not you support or oppose the idea of a wikiproject dedicated to organizing a more efficient process of getting articles in different languages translated into English. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Tested

Hi Amalthea, User:Amalthea/test21 is an interesting test, but while it exists there's going to be a succession of admins seeing the pink message that says that category isn't empty and then visiting your page. May I suggest that if you want your page to appear like that, you subst it and then decategorise it? Thanks ϢereSpielChequers 16:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I took the liberty of removing the {{User:Amalthea/test20 | blanked=yes}} tag from this page as it was showing up in Category:Attack_pages_for_speedy_deletion. I hope it didn't mess with your test. Toddst1 (talk) 16:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Whoopsie, sorry for the noise, guys. Those were test pages for a modification of the db-attack template, for Twinkle mostly, and I of course meant to remove them immediately. Cheers, Amalthea 17:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Syntax cleanup

Regarding this: looks excellent this time around, thanks! Nja²⁴⁷ 09:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm unsure why it broke with the first try. Actually, it might have displayed correctly in the actual editnotice since the base UAA notice apparently displayed incorrectly for the last two months as well, but when I checked at WP:UAA it looked OK (and nobody complained during the last two months either). Hmm.
Cheers, Amalthea 10:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Give SEMI Protection

Amalthea, Please can u give semi protection to Asal Page please. Davidbilla2007 (talk) 09:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you show me which condition of WP:SEMI applies to the page? Amalthea 10:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Batch deletions

Was it you who wanted to keep testing the batch deletions? If so, could you delete (or could you delete anyway)) all mottos from Wikipedia:Motto of the day/June 1, 2009 to Wikipedia:Motto of the day/June 30, 2009 per usual G6? Simply south (talk) 22:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep. Can I delay those deletions a little so that I can revise the tool first? I assume they aren't particularly pressing? Cheers, Amalthea 10:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

No, not urgent but they have been archived\saved as usual. Simply south (talk) 13:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Gone. Cheers, Amalthea 21:24, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Now could you also do July? Simply south (talk) 19:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, gone. Cheers, Amalthea 20:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Late reply

I made a late reply at [4] . It's interesting talking with you.

Incidentally, if you don't believe this ancient wikipedian, how about talking with User:Mindspillage or User:Eloquence, who authored the switch from GFDL to CC-BY-SA? ;-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 04:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied there, but if what you said is correct then it seems Wikipedia's license is the way it is for purely pragmatic reasons: compatibility with GNUPedia. Amalthea 06:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be a rather large sacrifice for pure pragmatic reasons, don't you think? I'm pretty sure that Richard Stallman actually convinced Jimmy Wales that GFDL was the way to go. --Kim Bruning (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Code query

Heya, thanks for the assistance recently in correcting my coding errors with the headers and editnotices at UAA. I noticed in the history of Easyblock's source code that you've edited it in the past. I was wondering if you may be able to assist me. If you look here, there's an issue we're having with Easyblock blocking the two new username violation templates ({{uw-shortublock}}) & {{uw-botublock}}) as hard, when they're meant to be soft. It correctly does the older template ({{uw-ublock}}) as soft, and I can see in Easyblock's code where it specifies that {{uw-ublock}} is an indefinite softblock, but I wouldn't dare add in the two new ones myself as I'd likely ***k it all up. I emailed Animum yesterday about it, but he seems to be busy or away. We'd like to ensure admins aren't hard blocking people unknowingly when the templates are meant to be soft. Thanks for any assistance. Nja²⁴⁷ 15:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Is this resolved with this edit already? I haven't read the discussion yet so I'm not sure I fully understand what you're asking. :) Amalthea 16:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

No, that edit was simply a rename of the template {{uw-shortublock}}. The issue is the now renamed template, along with {{uw-botublock}} are meant to soft-block people (just as {{uw-block}} currently does), but instead they're both hard blocking people. If you run a search/find in Easyblock.js's code for ublock, the first instance of it is:

//Set the default values

if(duration == "indefinite") {

if(reason != "{{uw-ublock}}") {

nocreate = nocreate_ ? true : nocreate;

autoblock = autoblock_ ? true : autoblock;

I believe that's the bit of code that ensures when someone uses uw-ublock the block is soft. The goal is to have anyone using uw-botublock and now uw-softerblock do the same, ie soft block people , as currently they're both hard blocking people. I think all the needs done is to add the names of the two new templates in where if(reason !={{uw-ublock}}") is, or duplicate that exemption for each, but I'm unsure and don't want to screw things up. Nja²⁴⁷ 20:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright. Yes, that would have worked, but actually it could be done far easier. Don't ask me why the uw-ublock settings are hardcoded like this, probably for legacy reasons.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant, thanks! Nja²⁴⁷ 08:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Amalthea 08:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

template:afd

Please don't modify highly visible templates without testing and discussion. - Altenmann >t 22:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Okaaay ... I've started a section at Template talk:Afd. And I quite certainly did test before making the change. Amalthea 22:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Closure of Twinkle Bug 317

Without access to history for deleted pages, I can't provide diffs as proof as I would like to. I AfD'd two articles today via Twinkle. The first was World Chicken Population, on which only the AfD template remained after I AfD'd it. Thinking this was a fluke and the article got CSD'd while I was AfD'ing it, I removed the AfD entry. The second article was Jackson basketball championships, which after I tagged it, sure enough only had the AfD template left by Twinkle. It's certainly quite possible both were coincidences. If I see the bug again I'll try to give proof. Tckma (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

In both cases, the article in question was moved or deleted before you tagged (i.e. accidentally recreated) it.
And to expand on the rather curt closure of #317, next time please provide a diff right away, and try to state what's the actual problem before any interpretation or guess as to the cause. I welcome all bug reports of course, and what you observed is a bug (with an open report somewhere), but you left a description of what I knew doesn't happen, without a diff of where that problem occurred, which left me hunting through your contributions to look for anything that might get misinterpreted as an AfD nomination clearing out the page content.
Amalthea 20:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for finding those logs; now I know how to get to the delete/move logs for a specific article. That would have prevented me from filing the report in the first place. --Tckma (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. The quickest way to get to the page logs is usually by way of the history tab, which has a "show logs for this page" link. Amalthea 14:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

JustTollywood

Hi,

Thanks for your info. I read the guidelines and I note your point of not adding profile pages as homepage or official website. I would remove those which were already added ones at the earliest. As per external links, I am pretty sure they are according to the guidelines. I also checked your statement on the copyright of images. I am adding just a link for the gallery on our website where we cite the sources of the images ( wherever applicable) and if they are in violation of any copyrights we remove them. As we are not uploading any copyrighted images to wikipedia it does not violate any guidelines.

Please, do correct me if I am wrong. I do not deny the fact that I am taking wikipedia's help in order to generate some traffic to my website but at the same time I also like wikipedia and respect the entire community. So, if you still think that I am violating any rules do let me know.

Regards, Srchalla —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srchalla (talk • contribs) 02:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate your openness, but if you own that website then it's inappropriate for you to link to it, see our guidelines about conflict of interest and external link spamming for more information. With regards to the galleries, I do have to assume that you do not own copyright to most of the images you display there, and Wikipedia must not link to such pages (see WP:LINKVIO).
I can accept that you add selected links where your page provides encyclopaedic information than can't already be found at e.g. the IMDb page (and doesn't have any copyright violations). But if you use the external links section only as a means to promote your page, and add it indiscriminately, then it might be added to the external links blacklist, which can actually backfire since some search engines are apparently penalizing domains listed there. Amalthea 11:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Page Deleted with no reason and original article recovery

Dear Amalthea

I write this note cause i need your help in the following matter. My page recently deleted, named: HH Sri Swami Guru Devanand Saraswati Ji Maharaj" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HH_Sri_Swami_Guru_Devanand_Saraswati_Ji_Maharaj has been deleted according to me by accident or human error.

Quoting the log shown in the deletion page, this say: "7 August 2009 Orangemike (talk | contribs) deleted "HH Sri Swami Guru Devanand Saraswati Ji Maharaj" ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)" It mentions: G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion which is a terrible mistake. There is not promotion or advertising whatsoever. It is a brief biography of someone based on the sources provided at the bottom of the article.

I would like to know how can i publish it or make it published and in the mean time if any error found, i want to know a way to make it publishable.

Looking forward to your help in this matter and subsequently publishing of the article mentioned above,

Thanks in advance,

Regards

Henry Alzamora, MBA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Henryalzamora (talk • contribs) 20:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia
The main problem with the article that led to its deletion was that the language used in it was very praising, so much so that it was interpreted as blatant promotion, for example "was part of a brilliant and renown enlightened Spiritual Masters generation", or "Since the 60's many people and generations have witnessed truly deep and permanent changes and real happiness in their lives making Him one of the most important personalities through out the entire Americas hemisphere and the whole world. He is renown by many authorities, sages and yogis in India as a very and highly Enlightened Yoga Master."
Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and such language isn't compatible with that. In addition, extraordinary claims such as these need very good and reliable references, so that the claims can be verified. Your references all were to specialized Devanand yoga center, which aren't independant of the topic and have to be assumed to be biased, so they can only be used to support some very basic facts as primary sources.
Going forward from this, if you can write a neutral article on the topic then you are free to just start again. I would very strongly recommend that the first version of the article is a basic description of the person (who is he, when has he lived, and why is he a person of encyclopaedic notability), and that you add at least one reference to a reliable, independant source that confirms the importance of the person (if possible this reference should be available online - try checking google news, google books, and google scholar). I could provide you with the deleted text of the article, if you want, but I believe it will need a complete rewrite before it can remain on Wikipedia as an encyclopaedic article. If you want, you can also develop the article in your user space at first, for example at User:Henryalzamora/Sandbox, and once you think it is ready ask me or someone else to have a look, and then move it into article space. And of course, if you haven't yet, you might want to have a look at WP:Your first article.
I hope I've answered your question, feel free to get back if I can help you more.
Amalthea 12:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A suggestion

Given that a bot can move talk pages when you move a page I would strongly suggest somebody creates a bot so when you move a page to a certain title it automatically edits all those pages which previously linked to that link and change the links in the articles accordingly.... There is absolutely no reason why there couldn't be a bot to do that, seems straightforward enough. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 16:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

At the very least if a page is turned into a disambiguation page, and the link existed at the time of the move ... I'm not sure how many false positives that would produce, but it sounds like a good idea, I agree. WP:BOTREQ. Amalthea 17:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Since double-redirects are no longer an issue, what problem would this solve? – iridescent 18:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Turning pages into disambiguation pages, like Asal today, wouldn't require disambiguating all incoming links by hand once the created redirect is overwritten by the DAB page.
And hmm, I don't think double redirects are working at the moment, at least bugzilla:17934 is still open? Amalthea 18:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Have they disabled them again? I lose track - Brion did say he'd enabled them all. – iridescent 19:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I haven't read anything during the last couple months, but they aren't working at the moment. Amalthea 19:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• Vacating a primary use to create a dab in its place always causes problems that require manual repair... Unfortunately too many folks do this but don't do the follow up. –xeno^talk 19:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Switching all links which, at the time of the move, pointed at the newly created DAB page should never make things worse than they were before the move, so I don't think that part requires manual cleanup.
    I don't know how many pages are turned into DABs each day, but since nobody can tell how many false positives this would cause maybe a bot report for WP:WP DAB with all page moves followed by turning the page into a DAB with all links pointing at the page might be a good start, those could be fixed semi-automatically then. Creating such reports seems like an easy enough job, and I'd think it would be worth the effort. Amalthea 19:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
    • You would think so... but see User talk:Arcadian#Amoeba for a counter-point on that. –xeno^talk 19:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
      • Well, that was an unproductive discourse if I ever saw one. From how I interpret it, yes, if the links were wrong before, they will still be wrong. It probably wouldn't hurt if the bot would post a notice to the person who created the disambiguation page, with a link to the edits made by the bot in the attempt to fix the links. Amalthea 20:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
        • I think the Grecian's position was that it would've been better to "start over" as it were and have them point at the disambig page, not that I necessarily agree. The saga continued here, if you're interested. In any case, your idea of the bot leaving a note for the page-mover would be one way to have some human oversight. –xeno^talk 20:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your kind note. I have answered all here: User talk:Huldra#The blue soup, Huldra (talk) 22:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Help with a persistant vandal

Hi there. I noticed you made an edit on the Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and was wondering if you might take a look at Cyberfox1954 and just give me your opinion on what he/she has been doing. He/she has been making multiple opinionated comments on the Megrahi talk page which I have been attempting to revert as I see them, and I have now received two false warnings from this person, one of which was accompanied by the text: "Your threats, and that is what it amounts to do you no justice. If you continue to revert my legitimate edits I will report you for vandalism. This is my last warning.". I'm not an admin, but I am a longtime editor here, and I believe that this user has done enough to warrant a block on the 3rr alone. Sorry to bother you over this, but I'm getting sick of having to tell this person that they're violating policy and I certainly am tired of the false warnings from a vandal! Any help you can give would be much appreciated! Thanks and best wishes. Sky83 (talk) 16:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a look now. Amalthea 09:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Had a look, and left him a message. I'll keep an eye on the article as well. I'll note that you were technically over the 3RR line yourself on the talk page (WP:Talk page guidelines is not exempt), and would recommend that next time you notify someone (or WP:AN/I) a little earlier.
And, well, getting some warnings in return comes with the territory, I'm afraid, I've gotten enough of those myself. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 10:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks tonnes for that. Yeah, I pretty much had to violate that rule lol, just trying to keep him/her in check, but my apologies anyway :P. I'll definitely take your advice and notify quicker in the future. Thanks again :). Sky83 (talk) 12:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to put in my oar, is it ok for a self-professed longtime user to break the rules (when they should know better) any more than myself?? It is not a matter of one rule for him and another for everyone else, there are no brownie points available for being an oldtimer or is there??--Cyber Fox (talk) 17:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't say it was, but circumstances matter. And I'd like us all to move on from this now. Amalthea 17:07, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The Crown Office in Scotland

Having spent a considerable bit of time pouring over the Megrahi article and having much knowledge of Scottish Law, I have notice an ambiguity with the name of the Crown Office.

To explain, the prosecuting authorities in Scotland are The Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service. basically, this is a two tier system with the Procurator Fiscal Service being subservient to the Crown Office. The Procurator Fiscal Service consists of lawyers whilst the Crown Office consists of Advocates (Junior Counsel) and QC's (Senior Counsel). You can be a Senior Counsel and not a QC but hey, I wont confuse you!!

Anyway, I noticed that Wikipedia does not recognise the name Crown Office but only has Crown and Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service as names. This is incorrect as you do not refer to the prosecuting authority as the Crown as this relates to the British monarchy. Can you add the keyword Crown Office to the database as I do not have sufficient knowledge to do so. Thank you. --Cyber Fox (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Too late about confusing me. :)
Soo ... we have Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, Crown Office which redirects to the former since 2005, The Crown (the corporation sole), and Crown, which is a disambiguation page, but doesn't mention the office. If I understand you correctly, you asked that Crown Office be a valid link target, but that seems to be already the case?
Amalthea 17:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

You've confused me now. LOL I want the edit to be this ...I hope! --Cyber Fox (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

See, it doesn't work! --Cyber Fox (talk) 17:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Does now. :)
I've created both The Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service and Crown office as redirects. Crown Office already existed (capitalization is important, except with the first letter). Check the wikitext to see how to do that yourself.
Cheers, Amalthea 17:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

...and it should be written with a & and not an and. --Cyber Fox (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, they seem to be writing themselves with an "and" though. Amalthea 17:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

You are absolutely right there, its been a long day, ignore that bit then.--Cyber Fox (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

User:LessHeard vanU/Mini stubs

;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 17:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

My name is longer. :p Amalthea 17:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but yours is sortable, you win. :) Amalthea 17:26, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Please take a look at this

Responding to several comments over at the NOT talk page, based on the idea of "unencyclopedic" content, including yours, I put up a new section, Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#The reason why the "unencyclopedic" argument just doesn't fly on that talk page. Much of the "unencyclopedic" argument is a pet peeve of mine. It's a bit of a tangent to the main discussion, but I'd be interested in your thoughts on it. Thanks, Noroton (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Broken scripts

I have done a diasnostic and even with ONLY two scripts in my vector.js, the qui tool, and the date and time tool wouldn't work. And the compatablity script option in my preferences has disappeared. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 22:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Did it work when you had your vector.js emptied? And stopped working when you put stuff back in? As I said, using only gadgets worked very well for me, in IE8.
The compatibility script was removed since its functionality is no longer required.
Cheers, Amalthea 22:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The purge clock worked. Those two scripts did not work. (So far with my diagnostic). --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 00:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Qui, and the reword tool does not work. I've give up. I think I'll go using the non-beta version where all of my tools works. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 00:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Good and bad double redirects

As one of the people who contributed to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_44#Double_redirects, you may be interested in Wikipedia talk:Double redirects#Many double redirects are good. — Sebastian 00:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Replied there, but the situation is unchanged ATM. Amalthea 11:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Signature

Hope you don't mind but I thought your signature looks quite stylish...Himalayan Explorer 09:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to rip it off. Although, maybe you might want to use a somewhat more Himalayan color? Amalthea 11:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Flattery will get you nowhere! LOL --Cyber Fox (talk) 11:21, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Rihanna Knowles

This user is breaking the established consensus on Rihanna's genres and is using unreliable sources to justify it. He's been politely warned once by myself and another user. Would you mind taking a look? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Left him a message, and with great regrets have added the article back on my watchlist. ;) And if I were prone to use swear words I would now say "Those fucking infobox genres!!!1!". Luckily, I'd never do that.
Cheers, Amalthea 11:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Haha. He also left quite the nasty personal attack on my talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 17:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I saw that, but didn't find it particularly bad? I'm not quite sure what he's trying to say there anyway …. Amalthea 17:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

you have to look at the edit differnces. Another user trimmed down his much more elaborate message. And I consider using my ethnicity to try and justify a point particularly offensive. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 17:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Eh. Ok, that last word of this escaped me, I only skimmed over the titles, and Rossrs's warning was lost among the others as well. And yes, he insinuated a kind of COI, but seriously, that's so far fetched that I'd just ignore it. :) Amalthea 17:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I suppose. I've been watching a number of Law & Order episodes over the last few days and racially provoked attacks of African Americans happened to be the subject matter of two cases. Guess my nerves are a tad frayed. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 17:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

← Rihanna Knowles (talk · contribs) is still at it on Rihanna, just not using edit summaries this time. — Σxplicit 23:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

And that's not the worst of it. Pity. Amalthea 00:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi

Thanks for your edits there. Can I ask your opinion on the removal of the image of the subject? Specifically, are you adhering to the principle that any non-free image of a living person is verboten? Because I think this situation is a bit special; a dying man, in Libya, may be much harder than most to obtain a free image of. --John (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I'm not too deeply invloved with non-free use questions, so I can't tell how borderline cases tend to be decided. I typically default to WP:NFC#UULP, yes, and in this case, even though he might be terminally ill and in the last phases of his disease, it's possible or even probable that he will make a number of semi-public appearances in the near future, in particular if he gets his book written in time. Appearances in Libya, of course, I can't judge how difficult it would be for a person to get access.
As indicated, I don't know where the line is usually drawn, and my opinion on that isn't too strong, so if you disagree and write up a FUR for this use then I won't object.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how you can object anyway as this particular image has been in use quite properly in another article for a considerable time. If another non-free image of an element of an article is used elsewhere within Wikipedia, either referring to its other use or, more preferably, repeating its use on the list are strongly preferred over including a new, separate, non-free image. Maybe you yourself will revert your edit and return the image it to its proper place. --Cyber Fox (talk) 14:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

The use of a fair-use image elsewhere doesn't justify the use in Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and, as mentioned, by default I'd say that a fair use image can't be used in the infobox at all, per WP:NFC#UULP. If someone writes a compelling fair-use rationale that covers all of the WP:NFCC then yes, the very same image should be used. Anything further should probably be discussed with the experts at WP:Media copyright questions. Amalthea 14:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

do explain

How to upload an image. The entire procedure is clumsy and is it possible for me to snap photos of all celebrities and have my own copy right. brief me the possible way to upload an image, how to find it is copyright unprotected...§§15:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Rajirocks (talk)

I'm not quite sure what you're asking. I'd think the procedure is pretty well explained at Special:Upload. I don't know which country you're from, but yes, in most legal systems I assume that if you personally take an image of someone, then you own copyright of that image. There might be other rights involved that may can apply though, that will depend on the laws of the country you're in.
If you have the opportunity to take a picture of a celebrity, then I would recommend you take a whole series, and upload one of them in full resolution, with full EXIF metadata, preferably at commons:Special:Upload.
I agree that uploading pictures properly can be a bit difficult, if copyright and licensing questions are ignored. The one you previously uploaded was already available, in a slightly modified form, at several places in the web, for example here. It was also of low resolution, and both factors combined almost always indicate that the uploader simply found it on the internet, and uploaded it. Such images however are hardly ever suitable on Wikipedia since they infringe the rights of the copyright owner.
I'd gladly help you if you have any more detailed questions. Amalthea 19:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the link on creating an account

Hi amalthea. Thanks for the link on Cyberfox's talk page. Ive got started in creating my account now (though it still needs some padding out). AlbagubrathMegrahi (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you're welcome. :) Amalthea 20:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna Knowles

Thanks for blocking them. Funnily enough, I looked at your recent contributions, thought you offline, and was in the process of making an AN/I report when I saw that you had already blocked them! It's a shame they ignored all the warnings and continued to edit war and attack other editors. Thanks again, Amalthea. Acalamari 18:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I pretty much was offline, just happened to check my watchlist at the "right" time. And yes, it is a shame, I'd hoped they'd reconsider before it came to blocks, but I didn't really have high hopes considering their edits of the last couple of days. :\
Cheers, Amalthea 20:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

That's a funny coincidence, as a similiar thing happened to me at roughly the same time: I had just logged in, and there weren't any orange bars on my screen, though when I checked my watchlist a couple of seconds later, the bar flashes up! I just wish the post had been friendlier though. :\ Acalamari 20:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

User talk:76.173.119.61

An IP has vandalized my page. I'd say could be a number of previous editors I've encountered, but I'm not sure who. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Apparently this user made a formal complaint about my racism. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, Stephan already marked it as resolved. I can semi-protect your user page, if you want, but other than that, there's little that can be done by me. As mentioned above, and as sad as it is, it does come with the territory if you are keeping a close eye on pages where a number of extreme views come together. To quote my favorite author, "wear it as a badge of honor".^[5] :-\ Amalthea 13:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
1. ^ ... and there's a "Trivia King's Barnstar" in it for the one who identifies the quote (without cheating). :)

Paris Hilton

Yeah, I was checking that users contribs, had quite a few tabs open at once and got mislead by a bad google search.--Crossmr (talk) 14:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright, thanks for getting back. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 14:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Kriterium

Thanks for enlarging my German vocabulary. Sie schreiben so schön englisch! --John (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I do? Wow, thanks, my English teacher has always held a quite different opinion. :) Und Du kannst mich gerne duzen.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Ich versichere Dich so, und ich auch bin englische Lehrer. Danke für die Erlaubnis, Dich zu duzen, das freut mich sehr. --John (talk) 16:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the compliment, then. :) Cheers, Amalthea 21:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. How's my German? Please be honest, it's been a long time and I fear I am out of practice. --John (talk) 23:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Pretty good I think! I would have worded some things a little differently (e.g. "Ich versichere es Dir, und ich bin auch Englischlehrer"), but really just minor things.
Cheers, Amalthea 08:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

On a side note, I know what you mean with your English teacher holding a different opinion. Although I had <self-praise>the best grade of the whole school in my English Abitur</self-praise>, up to the 11th grade some English teachers kept telling me that my English was mediocre at best (I even had a teacher who told me that my sentences are too complex to be English ). So don't worry about English teachers, they are quite often mistaken. I, too, think your English is very good. Regards SoWhy 09:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I'm afraid they were right at the time. :) Amalthea 13:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

LOL, then you must have improved considerably. Have you heard this before? "In Ulm, um Ulm, und um Ulm herum". It's a tongue twister. People here I've tried it on tend to just look at me strangely. Oh well. --John (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I can imagine. :) If you're interested in those, there are more to twist your tongue at de:Zungenbrecher. --09:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

That is excellent, thank you. Some I knew and some I didn't. --John (talk) 18:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for unblock

Hi. I believe that for some reason User:Ashley kennedy3 is blocked from editing wikipedia. This is extremely unfortunate as he is unable to add coordinates from his map to many of the village articles I created or contribute to the project in the way I know he would like. He seems to be a very resourceful and willing contributor, I have no idea what happened previously to get him seemingly blocked indefinately, but whatever conflict caused this block it seems to have settled or at least he wants to move on. Can you give him a second chance? He seems to have a lot of potential in regard to Israel-Palestine articles and we need as many contributors as possible on here to improve quality... Himalayan 08:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

• This link to the discussion which led to his one-year block may be of use as background. Thanks for placing this request Himalayan Explorer. Tiamut^talk 08:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
• (ec) That's not an unblock I can just give, I'm afraid. You can read up on the incidents that lead to the one-year block at WP:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles and WP:ANI#Ashley Kennedy's recent edits. I'm personally not familiar with the case, but there were a couple of short blocks leading up to it.
  What Ashley should do is write up an informal request for unblock on her talk page, "explain how things will be different", and you should then notify User:Jehochman about it. If he declines, Ashley should follow the normal WP:APPEAL process.
  As mentioned I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the ARB case, or the on-wiki conflict, but her talk page gives me a good impression, so I believe there's a good chance that an appeal will be successful.
  OK? Cheers, Amalthea 08:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks for responding thoughtfully Amalthea. By the way, Ashley is a he. :) Tiamut^talk 09:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Sorry. Amalthea 13:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
  • I see, OK thanks. He should request an unblock. It is shame to lose a contributor over some conflict for a whole year... To me, it looks like it could be resolved... Himalayan 09:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

1. Why are third parties asking for unblock rather than the principal? They should speak for themself.
2. Why choose this particular administrator, rather than addressing me in the first place?

Nothing here suggests that the blocked editor understands what they did wrong or that they will behave better. On the contrary there is evidence that a group of editors intends to resume a partisan battle (based on the suggestion on my talk page that there's a one sided article). We don't correct one sided articles by unblocking an editor with a history of disruption. Jehochman ^Talk 12:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't answer that, and from what I see at User talk:Ashley kennedy3#Request for unblock there's no unblock request forthcoming from Ashley kennedy3 anyway. I am convinced that Himalayan Explorer has requested this only in good faith. He learned from Tiamut that Ashley kennedy3 was blocked, didn't investigate but came straight here since I've recently lifted an autoblock of User:Dr. Blofeld aka. User:Himalayan Explorer.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

ADMINISTRATOR WIKI.

Yeah

I am new at this but i was only trying to correct you from your post. I believe that administrators don't know what they are doing at times. I read wiipedia pages with so many errors. I would like to know how do you become an administrator of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Janay1988 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd say because a huge majority of people trusted him. But that's irrelevant from the edits you are criticizing, they are irrelevant to someone being an administrator. Amalthea just politely asked you a question. This is a wiki, anyone can edit and so can you. If you see an error, fix it (or, if you can't because it's protected like Rihanna is, request a change by placing {{editsemiprotected}} on the talk page). There is nothing "magical" about it, the page is only currently protected against vandalism and can be edited by any auto confirmed user. Regards SoWhy 17:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Like SoWhy said, you do not need to be an administrator to edit the Rihanna article, for this particular article you only need to wait two more days until your account is old enough to be auto-confirmed.
Let's keep the content discussion at Talk:Rihanna though, where other editors can join it. I believe the "song-writer" bit has already been removed from the article anyway.
Kind regards, Amalthea 09:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Deleted article "Treysan"

Hello. Could I please receive a copy of my deleted article? Also, why was it deleted? I see several other companies here Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chicagoan75 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Certainly, I've moved it to User:Chicagoan75/Treysan, where you can copy it or continue to work on it.
It was deleted by Nihiltres under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article did not indicate how or why the company is important or significant, that is why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia.
If you want, you can work on the article in your userspace, at User:Chicagoan75/Treysan, and try to make sure it passes our inclusion criteria for companies, which are laid out at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). In particular, your should include at least one reliable, third-party source (typically a newspaper) that discusses the company in depth. It does not have to be available online, and does not have to be in English, although it is preferred.
Once you are satisfied and believe it passes those criteria, you can move it back to Treysan. If you want, you can also ask me or someone else to have a look at it first, so that it won't suffer the same fate as before.
In addition to that, if you are affiliated with the company I would also recommend you have a look at our business FAQ.
If you have any more questions, feel free to ask!
Kind regards, Amalthea 09:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Problem with Twinkle

Hi Amalthea, would you mind helping me? I added Twinkle to my monobook.js and found a few things I wanted to configure. I loaded the configuration and tried to alter it, and now Twinkle isn't working at all. Not sure what I have done wrong! SoWhy said you were the person to ask, ;-) Thank you! Maedin\^talk 09:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, should be working now. You'll need to bypass your browser cache to see any changes. When you removed the summary ad text, you should have left quotation marks in place, and removed only the text between them.
Cheers, Amalthea 09:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah-hah. I see! Thank you very much! Maedin\^talk 10:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. And no worries about the misunderstanding at SoWhy's page. Somewhere in the archives is a hint as to how I ended up with my username. :) Cheers, Amalthea 10:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh thank you, I'm glad you didn't mind! At least I won't make that mistake again, ;-) Maedin\^talk 10:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

3RR - User :78.148.239.206

Can you maybe have a word with this unregistered user who is intent upon causing trouble here [6] I suspect? They insist on adding charter flights which are pie in the sky yet! If every airport article carried such info where would it all end? --Cyber Fox (talk) 13:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Was already taken care of. Next time you might want to directly report at WP:3RR, or WP:RFPP. Amalthea 18:45, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you please take a look?

Here. Thanks, --John (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yikes. Can do, but that will take me a bit, and I'm not sure if it's still relevant since apparently an RfC was opened at the same time you asked, but I will read through it tonight. --Amalthea 18:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for revert

cheers.  Chzz  ►  22:48, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Amalthea 22:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Could you please...

I wonder if I can outsource this request to you since you are better with templates and such and thus can probably better decide how to redirect those templates for maximum efficiency. :-) Regards SoWhy 06:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but there was nothing to it, really: {{Db-f4}}, {{Db-f6}}, {{Db-f11}}. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 07:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. The image part of CSD is not really my strength and I am not that clueful when it comes to the templates used there. :-) Regards SoWhy 08:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

MOTD August

Batch deletions please. Simply south (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

All gone: Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Motto of the day/August. Cheers, Amalthea 16:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks as usual. Simply south (talk) 19:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, now

Please remember that Wikipedia's civility policy applies to edit summaries as well. We ask you, please, to confine your comments to content rather than commenting on contributors, as you did here. And as a personal note, I happen to think you're dead wrong. That particular contributor is undoubtedly one of the more competent contributors I know! (Oooh, your talk header knows my name!!!!) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Waah, you scared me!! Thanks, and very nice to see you back on your feet.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully not too badly. :) I'm good at laughing at other people's humor, but making my own, not so much. It's a disability. :/ I'm still impressed that your talk header knows much name. How does it know my name? Can I get mine to do that? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Only when I saw you using multiple exclamation marks did I realize you were joking. :) There's by the way even a policy on that issue: WP:No self attacks.
The {{REVISIONUSER}} magic word displays, if used in editnotices and many other system notices, the name of the user currently looking at the page instead of the user having saved the revision. That's a rather funny (accidental) feature, and it might be removed again sooner or later (see bugzilla:19006), but I enjoy it while it lasts, and so do you now: It displays my name if you look at the page, but if shown in its capacity as an editnotice the real magic of the magic word unfolds (to be poetic). :)
Cheers, Amalthea 17:18, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

"ignore the voices in their head"--classic. :D Thanks for a good laugh. (Note to self: multiple exclamation points, good; move forward in future.) And, whoot, my edit notice has magic! Thank you. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) Amalthea 23:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for my first Barnstar. I'll treasure it as long as I edit here. :) ForestAngel (talk) 21:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

High time then. And I believe it was also the first one I ever gave out, which makes it even more treasurable I think. :) Amalthea 23:22, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Chris Cox Megamix

Can u delete the Chris Cox Megamix page so that Chris Cox Megamix (Britney Spears song) can be moved to that? --PlatinumFire 13:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, done. Amalthea 14:23, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Thanks for removing the AfD notice from List of Britney Spears' songs for me. I completely forgot. Evil saltine (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries! Even though I was a bit surprised to see it closed as an unqualified "keep". :) Amalthea 07:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Esophageal pH Monitoring

Hi Amalthea,

You have deleted the figure that I had uploaded in the page: "Esophageal pH Monitoring". I am kind of new in this Wikipedia business, so I don't know know what was the reason for this deletion. I made that figure myself sothere should not be any issue with copyright. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArnoldChiari (talk • contribs) 15:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Arnold.
Can you give me some more details about this? I deleted a couple of images, most were redundant copies of lower or equal quality though. You are probably referring to the drawing you uploaded as File:Esophageal ph monitoring.jpg. If you say you made that figure yourself, I assume you mean that you modified the picture yourself, by inserting the labels and the white tube? I've found the background image published in numerous places on the web (e.g. [7]), which led me to believe that you do not own copyright to it. Thus, you can't release the derived image into the public domain either.
I'm also unsure about the DeMeester images you uploaded, again in multiple, partially redundant versions: File:Demeester.jpg, File:TRDeMeester.jpg, File:TRDeMeester.JPG (and one other was deleted, I believe): I've found parts of that same image published previously on the web as well. I'm guessing that the person depicted commissioned and paid for the image and probably owns copyright, which means you'd have to be him, which looks unlikely from your username.
Regards, Amalthea 08:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Lauren Branning

Hi

Thanks for your advice about the Lauren Branning page. The person concerned though did actually vandalise the page twice, once on September 1st and once on September 2nd, their contributions state that, that's why I posted a second warning. They had only received one warning but had carried out two vandalisms if you see what I mean? However I do accept that I maybe left it too long after the second vandalism attempt. --5 albert square (talk) 01:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, yes. It's certainly not a problem either way, and the edits the user made certainly warranted a final warning. My point was mostly that it's usually a waste of time to warn IPs several days after their last edit, in particular if they were already warned for their latest edit like in this case: they haven't edited in five days, so I would think that either the warnings got through, they switched IPs, or they lost interest. In two of those cases I find a late warning more harmful than helpful: Either a user reads it who already got the point, or the IP is allocated to an innocent other user who will get the orange bar and read a warning that wasn't intended for him.
But as I said, it's not a problem, just generally not really useful either. :)
Kind regards, Amalthea 08:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Libyan intelligence service

Hi
Would you have a source handy to confirm that Jamahiriya el-Mukhabarat is a Libyan intelligence service? The external link to GlobalSecurity.org doesn't mention the name, and I had no luck at Google news, but that's often difficult since transliterations tend to vary. Could you add one so that it isn't a completely unreferenced stub?
Thanks, Amalthea 19:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

It's from the article on Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. There are a lot of different transliterations on the Web, this one seems like the most standard. Equal Progress (talk) 21:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, can you give me one that yields some google news hits? Or some other reliable source? I noticed that it was linked in the Megrahi even before you started the article, but I'm surprised that I didn't find anything on the web. Is there some Libyan government webpage you know that mentions it? Amalthea 08:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing to stop you from doing a Google search. If you are so inclined, there's plenty of information on the Web and of course the CIA Fact Book. But you'll have to do your own work on that one. If the name is problematic, then you should correct it on the Abdelbaset Megrahi article and then rename the article on the Libyan intelligence service, or simply rename the article Libyan intelligence service. And I don't understand why you would want to keep this on my page only. You reply to other people here, so I will do the same. I find this suspicious. Equal Progress (talk) 22:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious? :) Nothing suspicious about it, I prefer keeping a discussion in one place, typically where it started, for context. We can gladly talk about it here.
I of course did a quick search, but was hoping that you could add a source to the article yourself. I don't know anything about it, and didn't say the name was problematic – I just like to get it right, and despite us having links to it both at the al-Megrahi article and at List of intelligence agencies, I was surprised to find no mention at Google for "Libyan Mukhabarat". If you can't help, I'll have to ask someone else. Amalthea 22:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I can get to it but this is a complex area which will require offline research. There isn't a great deal of information on the Internet that is current or neutral. In Arabic "Mukhabarat" means "intelligence" and "Jamahiriya" is the name of the Libyan style of governance ("republic of the masses") so this is likely the most correct transliteration of the name. There is a lot of information at the LOC Country Study website: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/lytoc.html, but a lot of it is outdated since its all from 1987. I'll try to get to the article later since it's going to be time consuming. Equal Progress (talk) 22:47, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

One problem is that most sources (again, most are not particularly neutral) on the Internet that discuss Libyan intelligence simply use the term "secret police" instead of the proper name of the ministry. Equal Progress (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I see. Well, if you can get to it, I'd be really grateful! I wouldn't like keeping the article without even a source to back its title.
It's really weird, I just tried some German online sources, but they all just seem to call it the Libyan secret service. Cheers, Amalthea 23:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I added a reference for the name from a title available through Google Books which is the best available source right now. It still doesn't mention the full name, and refers to the ministry as simply "Mukhabarat" which is the standard colloquial name for intelligence agencies in Arabic-speaking countries. Equal Progress (talk) 01:21, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Joseph vijay-The best dancer.jpg

Saw that you posted about this on User talk:The wind or breeze while I was removing the image from the page and adding it to the PUI log. I've oped a PUI discussion here. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 23:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I noticed. The image was deleted before, and he mentioned "donate" in his edit summary, so I wanted to give him the opportunity to comment on it. Since I didn't hear back from him, it has all indications of a blatant copyright violation, and the Vijay articles gets them very regularly, I've deleted it again.
Cheers, Amalthea 09:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

WT:TWINKLE#Adding userfication to Twinkle

Something I suggested yesterday dovetails with this; you may enjoy WT:RFA#Back to how to get more hard-working admins. I share your position that we only want to encourage userfication via Twinkle if CSD criteria are met. Not everyone knows the CSD criteria thoroughly, so I think we're talking about some kind of userright before they can get that Twinkle functionality, and my proposal was one flavor of such a userright. (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 13:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

That's certainly a possibility, although it makes userfication much more restricted than what was proposed. Not sure how useful it'd then be in Twinkle, would be better placed in the SD helper script (more or less what SoWhy just said there). But that's basically the dilemma I'm having with the proposal, yes, that I'd rather have a pair of admin eyes since it is essentially a speedy deletion. Which would reduce the proposal to adding a parameter to the SD tags with a recommendation by the tagger to userfy instead of delete. Amalthea 13:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm very happy to see the WP:INCUBATE project though, I find that much better than userfication since articles can be kept in an organized and supervizable place, and will be cleaned up again eventually. They can also be noindexed there without much trouble. Amalthea 13:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

By the way...

Do you have any idea what this might be?: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Walt+Disney+Platinum+Editions&diff=313855265&oldid=313851081 The edit, and most edits that I see that have this, is in good faith, with that "Proxy connection keep alive" stuff... It makes me wonder if their browser is having some kind of problem... do you know anything about this? Until It Sleeps 14:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I've read about that from time to time, see for example WP:Village pump (technical)/Archive 57#"Proxy-Connection:keep-alive -- Cache-Control: max-age=0". Seems to be a browser issue. I also remember that some javascript tools have caused similar things in the past, but I don't remember the circumstances – might have been workarounded by now.
Cheers, Amalthea 15:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, so I see that FF on a Mac can have problems with that. Thanks for the link. Until It Sleeps 15:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, anytime. Amalthea 15:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I found another person with the problem, and also, I did a search for "Proxy-Connection:keep-alive Cache-Control: max-age=0" , found, and cleaned all of that up... Mozilla really should do something about that... Until It Sleeps 17:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that's a problem with the current version, or only with an outdated one.
Anyway, there seem to be a dozen or so more, if you're in the mood (search cache might be out of date though). If not I'll take care of them tomorrow.
Cheers, Amalthea 19:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Those are the ones that my search turned up with, so yes, the search cache is out of date. Until It Sleeps 20:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alrighty, thanks then for taking care of it! :) Amalthea 20:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Toni Braxton

Thank you! I'm still learning... --Lvsi (talk) 15:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all! I'm glad you added the information, and all I had to do was switch to a more reliable source.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

That's Where You Take Me

Hi! Would U like to participate at the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/That's_Where_You_Take_Me_(2nd_nomination) deletion nomination? Tnx. --PlatinumFire 21:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied at your talk page. Amalthea 21:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanx anyway.......... I didn't do this because I want to turn it into the way I like to be or somethin, it just seemed like nobody is noticing that AfD, that's all. Sorry if I've done anything wrong. --PlatinumFire 21:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries. And don't worry about the AfD either, you're making a good case, and as you saw in the previous AfD of the topic, one reply can be enough anyway. Otherwise it'll get relisted for another 7 days.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:41, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I notice you didn't list the AfD at the log page, that's why only one person found it, and it hadn't been handled so far. It's now listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 September 16#That's Where You Take Me. Amalthea 15:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Amalthea, I'm Airplaneman. Nice to meet you. I was looking at ArcAngel's RfA and saw that you had responded to my comment, "I stumbled across three examples where they corrected SD tags originally placed there by you." No hard feelings, but were you referring to ArcAngel or me? Thanks, and see you around the encyclopedia! Airplaneman ^talk 21:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I was replying to the candidate, otherwise I would have indented one step farther that you did.
But yeah, it can sometimes be unclear who's talking tho whom. Wait for LiquidThreads, all's going to be well eventually ... :) Amalthea 21:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, interesting link. Thanks for pointing me to it! I just asked who you were mentioning because I patrol new pages... a lot; thank you for clarifying (:. Airplaneman ^talk 00:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Joey DeGraw

Hi,

I wish to add a photo to the Joey DeGraw page - I have permission, there are a number on http://joeydegraw.fanrising.com/tools which are available for members of the Web Team (fans) to use to promote Joey. I also have an e-mail giving me permission, I contacted them to double check. Unfortunately, the site doesn't appear to let me. Cal86w (talk) 19:47, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello
I'm not sure what you mean by "the site doesn't let you": What did you try, and what message did you get?
Regarding the image, the website you linked above states that the images are copyrighted. If those images are to be used on Wikipedia, they have to be released under a free license, ideally under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) or a CC-BY-SA-compatible license and, if possible, also the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Other free licenses, like those listed at WP:Image copyright tags/Free licenses, are also acceptable. All of them allow modification, redistribution, and usage for any purpose, including commercial purposes. Permission for use "on Wikipedia" is not enough.
If such a release was explicitly confirmed to you by the copyright owner in an e-mail, then you can upload the image, place the template {{OTRS pending}} in the summary, and forward that e-mail (with all e-mail headers, please) to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org while making note of the name of the image you uploaded. You can read more about it at WP:Confirmation of permission.
The whole process is admittedly rather complicated, but necessarily so I'm afraid, to protect the rights of the copyright owner. Wikipedia takes copyright law very seriously, and due to the high number of images uploaded in violation of copyright, we need to be very explicit. I hope you understand.
If you have any more questions, or are having trouble with the upload, don't hesitate to ask.
Cheers, Amalthea 10:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

db-nopermission-notce vs. di-no permission-notice

Hi, do you know if there's a specific reason {{db-nopermission-notice}} is used instead of {{di-no permission-notice}} when CSDF11-ing via Twinkle (or using the di-version for any of the other criteria for that matter)? I'm asking because Moonriddengirl says it's better but I'm a bit hesitant to change it in case there's a reason we're just not aware of.

If there isn't though, would I be right in that editing {{db-csd-notice-custom}} to what's currently at User:Aktsu/Sandbox2 (using an ifeq on the nopermission-paramter passed by Twinkle) is the best (actually easiest) way to change it, assuming that was the only one one wanted to change? Seems that way since as far as I can see Twinkle just pass a predetermined string ("nopermission", "badfiletype" etc.) to that template to create the warning, meaning changing it from Twinkle would mean either changing all the strings (and db-csd-notice-custom) or to make a custom function which doesn't use db-csd-notice-custom-template at all.

Also, since I'm already here and trying to learn the ParserFunctions-stuff, do you know if one can check if a input is equal to something or something else via an ifeq? I wanted the template to use the di-template if the input was "nopermission" or "f11" instead of only "nopermission" but didn't see any obvious ways... Thanks, --aktsu ^(t / c) 17:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

• I'll have a look later today.
  Concerning parser functions, there are several ways. The easiest is usually a #switch:

  {{#switch: {{{input}}} | nopermission | f11 = some result }}

  Cheers, Amalthea 08:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
• Alright, the reason was that the notification templates weren't redirected along with the CSD templates when WP:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 June 24#Template:Db-f5 and WP:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 23#Speedy deletion templates for CSDs F4 and F6 were closed. Twinkle thus was tagging with the proper "delete if" templates that require tagging for several days before appearing in the deletable SD categories, while it was still notifying with the old "delete because" notifications. {{Db-csd-notice-custom}} would have been a good hook to control the notification templates, but I've just redirected all those notification templates in parallel to the SD templates ({{db-f4}}/{{db-f4-notice}}, {{db-f5}}/{{db-f5-notice}}, {{db-f6}}/{{db-f6-notice}}, {{db-f11}}/{{db-f11-notice}}), since they lost all other raison d'être anyway.
  I still need to have a longer look at the image section of Twinkle though. Normally, the delayed "delete if" SD tags are applied via twinkleimage.js, using the "di" tab, while the "csd" tab should only offer the immediate "delete because" deletions. I'll certainly have to update the descriptions there. Or remove some options from there completely. Or combine both scripts into one. Or do something completely different. :)
  Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and Cheers, Amalthea 14:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Donald Castell and pH monitoring pages

Hi Amantha, Thank you for your message regarding Donald Castell and pH monitoring pages. You are right in regards of Castell page, part of it was copy and paste from that website, I planned to revised it later to keep the concept but changing the sentences. Anyway I will rewrite that page using my own word. Regarding the DeMeester picture, there is no copyright issue with it, where did you see a copy of that picture, nobody should have it, unless they took it from this Wikipedia page, Regards, Arnold
—Preceding unsigned comment added by ArnoldChiari (talk • contribs) 22:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello Arnold
Just rewrite it offline first and upload it then, next time. And please also have a look at WP:PLAGIARISM, just restructuring the sentences might not have been enough. Ideally, you should extract only the facts and write it from scratch.
Regarding the image, I found a crop of it at doctorsofusc.com. I seems to have been displayed there longer than it was at Wikipedia.
As I said, I'm guessing that the person depicted commissioned and paid for the image and probably owns copyright, which means you'd have to be him, which looks unlikely from your username.
Amalthea 08:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna

I'll give you one guess... The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh joy. I don't even remember taking it off my watchlist again, must have been subconsciously.
And sorry, but I still haven't read your Janet Jackson article. I had it with me over the weekend, but I didn't get around to it. The weather was much too nice. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 08:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Rihanna Knowles has been quite persistent. I don't know how many more sources I could possibly provide. Glad to find your days sunny! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

• I opened up another discussion on the talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 16:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Good will hunting

You've earned a lot of good will from me Amalthea. :) Yes, of course we haven't seen the last of the incivility from Giano or many other editors who do good work in the trenches. We have a crappy dispute resolution system, far too few mediators and problem solvers, and way too many police with itchy trigger fingers running around trying to do enforcements.

Sometimes people lose their cool. We could try the Clockwork Orange approach, or we can try to treat all our members with respect, improve our dispute resolution capacities, and live with some level of imperfection. I find many of the admins here indescribably inconsiderate, rude and arrogant, so how do I fix them? Incivility isn't just calling someone a name. And Giano is wonderfully entertaining and I has a deep passion and skill for article work, which is what this is all about. If he were treated more respectfully I am certain who would show more respect in return. But alas, the system is set up to work in reverse. I would like to see the emphasis put on solving problems and helping one another instead of finding reasons to block and looking for flaws to justify police actions against one another. That is the worst kind of incivility. We have lots of editors willing to offer up opinions, but far less willing to dig in and help sort out the mucky situations. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I can sure use it, being apparently all out myself. :)
I share your faithlessness in our dispute resolution system (without being able to offer a better alternative myself). Regarding your "If he were treated more respectfully I am certain who would show more respect in return" though, that goes both ways. Where did the respectlessness start? With Collectonian's talk page comment at Talk:Oroonoko? I don't see it. The discussion there started on the wrong foot with the "FAR looming" section name, but I only see the best of intentions. Someone said that Collectonian was uncivil, but I don't see that at all. Did it start with Collectionian's FAR nomination? I don't see it there either. It started with Giano's reply to the FAR, and escalated from there. I don't know what his problem was there. He hasn't clarified it either, he only reinstated it. I don't see that he was trying to make a point (not that that would be better), so I assume he was just annoyed that someone dared questioning the FA status of an article he was involved with, and lashed out.
It doesn't work that way. He needs to be shown respect? Then let him do the same. If any editor has to be treated like a raw egg lest risking his wrath, then that editor has to change his attitude. I'm also seeing lots of talk about Giano's friends and Giano's enemies in those threads. That might be another symptom of the issue, if anyone is so entrenched that they see editors as enemies then they need to do something else (or grow up). The FAR was no provocation.
You say we might have to improve dispute resolution with just those issues and try to "live with some level of imperfection". I don't see how dispute resolution could help to prevent such outbursts in the future, but I am all ears if you or anyone knows a way. I'm not prepared however to interpret "live with some level of imperfection" as "Giano may lash out as he pleases, and if he explodes again, we tell him 'be nice, or else ... well, nothing'". As I said, I don't expect perfection, but I expect to see an effort towards it, and that's completely absent here. Having looked at some older Giano-threads, I'm at a point where I see no other option than escalating blocks or a ban, everything else seems to have been tried. That is of course assuming that the community agrees with me and wants to prevent further outbursts. If it doesn't and finds that the comment and the lack of an apology isn't an issue, or that Giano has immunity and may make a number of personal attacks per month then, well, fine by me, but I might be out of here, cause that's not an environment I'm comfortable in, and while I'm fully aware of my relative worthlessness to the project I believe that in the long run we'd lose far more by tolerating such behavior than if we lost Giano, which is why I gave an opinion at ANI in the first place.
I've also remembered why I don't usually weigh in at AN(I). Stupid issues with only bad solutions, really not what I like thinking about. :\ And even less writing 6k about, sorry, I assume you came here so that we bring this to an end and not to listen to my rambling. :)
Cheers, and have a good day, Amalthea 17:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I love rambling. :) First of all there is no perfect solution. Did you check out my Clockwork Orange link? The cure is problematic. :) There will always be some incivility. I'm fine with pointing it out and trying to get it corrected, but punishment by admins doesn't seem very effective and seems to me to just promote more tension and anxiety.

As far as the cycle goes, I think it starts at the top . If admins tried to resolve disputes and correct behavior WITHOUT blocking that would help. Being blocked is a pretty nasty experience and often builds on itself. Those with block logs are stigmatized and previous blocks are used to justify new blocks. All of these blocks pile on editors who are already frustrated.

A better and more successful approach would be to help editors avoid and work through frustrations, and to show them kind consideration instead of punishment when they mess up.

The current cycle is as follows:

• content dispute
• dicussion goes nowhere
• escalates into ad hominem attacks
• admin intervention sought
• admin enforces policy
• those at the receiving end of enforcement feel slighted because they were right

My suggestion on a better approach would be:

• content dispute
• discussion goes nowhere
• This is the first opportunity for admin and editor intervention to help steer the discussion in an appropriate direction or to suggest ways to bring in outside input at the appropriate noticeboards (ie. dispute resolution).
• Defused

See how easy that was?

And even if we miss the proactive early stage for intervention and the dispute progresses through the ad hominem attack stage (second opportunity for intervention) or even to the "admin intervention sought" stage (final stage for appropriate help and intervention), that's a great time to for mediation to steer the disputants through the dispute resolution process and show them that we can work out our differences in an amicable and collaborative fashion. This is far superior to taking enforcement actions, which should always be a last resort. In fact I would reform the Arb system to make it about mediation instead of just enforcement.

People tend to resent police. And particularly in a collaborative community effort to build an encyclopedia, working together is better than putting people on constant defense and creating a tense police state and gangland atmosphere where it's important to have friends and allies who stick up for one another in order to survive. Look at our arb system, it's a Wikicourt that deals only with behavior and punishments instead of helping resolve the underlying problems and helping editors refine their skills at defusing and resolving content disputes. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey you can test out my methodology on the Sustainability article discussion page. It seems to be quite heated. They need some admin assistance in the form of mediation. Let me know how it goes! ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I've watchlisted it, but I'll let you try yourself – they don't need an admin, they need a cool head. I find it sadly amusing though that the last comment there by Travelplanner is confirming what I am saying below (and had typed before this) oh so completely. :\ Amalthea 14:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Before I get into this in detail, how would this help with a situation that spawned this most current incident? There was no discussion that went nowhere. How could one proactively counter it? Would you try to prevent that in the first place, and if so, how? Or would you accept it and calm down the victims of the attacks, to make sure they don't leave instead?
I'm really really curious how you think just this kind of situation should be handled in the future (or if you think it needs no handling). Cheers, Amalthea 20:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I probably would have left a polite request that the offending comment be refactored as it's not appropriate to collegial collaboration. If the targeted party was flustered I might leave them a note notifying them that I was attempting to get it corrected and that I appreciated their patience. If there was a refual to remove the comment a discussion would ensue. Other opinions would be offered and some consensus could be reached. I would be willing to refactor it myself noting it's not appropriate. If that too was undone and the attack restored then a block would probably be warranted. But again, a discussion and opportunities to correct the behavior should be engaged in first. Speaking of which, there's a statement on Killer Chihuhua's page by Giano refering to Sandstein as a bully. So we have a real world example of an inappropriate comment. I thought about asking Giano to remove it. But I decided it was best to just let it go. People get pissed and I think there has to be some leeway given. Sandstein did an overzealous block without warning on over a comment related to a stale dispute, which I think is a pretty uncivil action (yes I know, you don't think any more warnings are needed, but I disagree :) This has resulted in ill will and some uncivil lashing out againt Sandstein. It's a good example of why I don't think blocks reduce incivility, but simply add to it. There's something to be said for all of us having thicker skins and realizing that people get frustrated sometimes and say stupid things. We can point out to them that it's not helpful and ask them to do better. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

We're probably pretty similar in how we like to try and handle stuff like this. That's exactly how I would want to see it approached. Mostly our parameters seem to be different, where we see the worse collateral damage, and which cure we see as the more problematic - talks with no repercussions, I'd say, have done nothing to prevent further outbursts from Giano. He hasn't even shown a willingness to improve in that regard.
And that seems to be where we differ the most: I want to prevent future outbursts, not only damage-control them, because I don't want editors needing a thick skin. To quote L'Aquatique, "Long term incivility creates a hostile and toxic environment and people start to think, “Well hell, I don’t have to put up with this! I’ve got better things to do than to spend my free time getting verbally abused!” And there go our volunteers." For that reason, I find long-term civility issues just as problematic as other long term policy (i.e. community consensus) breaches: they all damage the encyclopedia. If the violation is clear and repeated, and talk seems to cause no long-term improvement, that last stern talk (i.e. final warning) has to be followed up with consequences if ignored during some probabtion period, else we end up with the Giano-situation, where he just is never going to improve in that regard, and I believe is causing collateral damage with the thin-skinners leaving.
And yeah, I expected some turbulences in the wake of this incident, and agree that it's best ignored here, Sandstein is certain to overlook such minor "bluntness" directed at him, so it's best left alone.
Mellow greetings,^[1] Amalthea 14:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

1. ^ to also use a movie reference for once

It's cool how you have your talk page set up to give a personal greeting at the top of the edit window. What movie is mellow greetings from? ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:12, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

You can set it up for yourself, if you want: See WP:Editnotice and User talk:Amalthea/Editnotice. The abuse of {{revisionuser}} might stop working at some point in the future, though, see bugzilla:19006.
Oh, and it's Demolition Man (film), probably the second best movie by Sylvester Stallone. Certainly his funniest one. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 20:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Control (Janet Jackson album)

Hi there. I spent the last three days revamping this article. Mind giving my an unbiased opinion on how it looks? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 15:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm probably the worst user you could have asked this, but I can read it tonight. :)
Realist2 seems pretty much gone, but Pyrrhus16 might be able to give more useful input than I can.
Cheers, Amalthea 16:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Realist and I are actually off-wiki buddies. We chat a lot over messenger. We've always avoided reviewing each other's work to stay neutral. In any event, I wasn't looking for an actual review, just a quick yay! or nay! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 16:11, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that's good to know that he's still around somewhere, I was pretty sad to see him pull back from Wikipedia following the death of MJ.
And hmm, I thought you were looking for a pre-WP:GAN-review?
Amalthea 16:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Egh, I can wait for the official review when someone decides to review it. Right now I just wanted to see if someone can read it as go "oh that all makes sense and I learned something new." The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 16:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright. As I said, I will read it tonight, but I'm pretty sure I'll be learning something new. :) Cheers, Amalthea 16:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

• Nudge, nudge, nudge. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I know. I've had the tab open in my browser for two weeks now.
    Did some minor tweaks, feel free to undo if it isn't correct: I changed curly braces into square brackets once in an citation, not sure if there is a reason to use curly ones I'm not aware of, and changed "took credits on" to "took credits for", which seems correct to me, but I'm not 100% sure.
    I'll need to read it again, but it certainly looks good to me, and I naturally learned lots of things since I pretty much knew squat about Janet Jackson's music. But as I said, I'm really the wrong person to ask for a more professional review. :) The only article I ever wrote is pretty much a mere collection of facts, and I'm afraid that's the extent of my abilities. I'll read it again though and try to give you somewhat more constructive criticism. :)
    Amalthea 11:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking over so far. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Light relief

Sorry to bother you, but I wondered if you were at all familiar with Rilke? I found a really nice poem of his and an English translation I made of it a good few years ago, when I was learning German, and put in on my user page as it seemed kind of apposite for the time of year and my wiki-mood. It's hard to translate poetry. What do you think? --John (talk) 04:57, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm the wrong person to ask. :)
I don't really find much pleasure in poems myself, but I know that one, back from school possibly, and I'd say you captured the spirit very well in the translation! Some things, though, looking at the first paragraph, I'd use a different word than "great", maybe "grand", since a "großer Sommer" is a rather unusual way to put it, with unclear meaning, so it should get a similar spin in the translation. One too few syllables, though, so maybe "immense", or "very large" or "so vast"? And maybe I'd turn around the "let loose the winds" line, to reflect the wording in the original. And it's again one too few syllables, so maybe: "and upon the farmlands let loose the winds", or maybe better "and upon the fields let loose of the winds"? So (diff):

Herbsttag

Autumn Day

Herr: es ist Zeit. Der Sommer war sehr groß.
Lord: it is time. The summer was so vast.

Leg deinen Schatten auf die Sonnenuhren,
Lay down your shadows onto the sundials

und auf den Fluren laß die Winde los.
and upon the fields let loose of the winds.

[...]

— Rainer Maria Rilke

And while I was just looking for help with this, there's a very nice workshop at http://www.textetc.com/workshop/wt-rilke-1.html that tries to find good translations for it, have a look at those (scroll down to the bottom for some versions).
Cheers, Amalthea 11:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and your "wiki-mood"? Summer has ended for Wikipedia, and the rather bleak days of autumn are upon us? :)
Amalthea 13:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that sort of thing. Comes of working too hard after quite a long summer break I suppose. And thanks a lot for the critique, that all makes sense, and for the link too. In the translation I made, I sacrificed flow for as-close-as-possible to the original language (I love that you can do that between Eng and Ger, they are that close). It's fun, but ultimately merely proves that you cannot adequately translate poetry, indeed you might define the poetry as that which is lost in the translation. Thanks again, --John (talk) 02:14, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and check your email. --John (talk) 02:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Stop Deleting links just because you dont like them.

You have repeatedly been delting links relating to Pan Am 103, in particular Justiceforlockerbie.com. This website is a source of publication of official reports, information and news regarding the subject of Pan Am Flight 103. Just because you look at a name and make a decision based on that you delete it. The website is 100% relevant to the pages it is posted on so please do not remove it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CloudSurferUK (talk • contribs) 10:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I've removed the link from any page. However, there's a section on the talk page of the article about that link. If you want to keep it in the article permanently, I would strongly recommend to make your case for it there, otherwise another editor will most probably come along and remove it again. Personally, my first intuition is that we shouldn't have it in the external links section since it appears to lead to a biased, non-neutral page (see WP:External links). Opinions obviously differ though, so please go to Talk:Pan Am Flight 103 and explain what you think.
Thank you, Amalthea 10:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

It does not support conspiracy, in fact it condones conpsiracies and deals purely with the truth. It is also not pro-megrahi or pro-libya. It deals purely with facts and offers articles and reports not available in the WP article.

Esophageal pH Monitoring

Hi Amalthea, I got your email, I had a busy week and did not have a chance to answer. I do my best to answer all your questions soon. Have a nice day--ArnoldChiari (talk) 23:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks by CloudSurferUK

Perhaps you should let this particular user know that personal attacks and unwarranted accusations are not welcome at Wikipedia? See Talk:Pan Am Flight 103. Why he hasn't been warned already is boggling. Equal Progress (talk) 08:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Because it wasnt a personal attack, it was a statement showing your clear bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CloudSurferUK (talk • contribs) 10:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I've replied at Talk:Pan Am Flight 103. Let's all please focus on the issue, and try to show explicitly why or why not it should or should not be included in the article (probably focusing on WP:EL#YES 3, WP:EL#MAYBE 4, and WP:EL#EL1). Accusations of bias or repeatedly saying "look at the guideline" without going into specifics doesn't advance the discussion at all.
Cheers, Amalthea 10:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The Voice of reason once again Amalthea :) CloudSurferUK (talk) 10:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Request

Would you agree to take care of this? I am working on Tfd templates, and suddenly found a stray transclusion... (shrug). Debresser (talk) 16:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, it's gone. You could also use {{db-xfd}} in such cases.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, this was my first non-admin closure, and the discussion was pretty outdated and my decision very much based on my own uderstanding of things. Three good reasons to ask somebody whom I know to respect wp:iar. Debresser (talk) 21:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, probably right. :) Amalthea 22:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

By the way, are there any skeletons in your closet that would advise against turning this link blue so that you can take care stuff like this yourself? Amalthea 21:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

There are. The only reason I would need adminship would be for the many edits I make to protected templates by nudging admins, especially User:Rich Farmbrough. Poor guy. Well, and the few requests for deletion a day. But I have had this serious conflict with User:William Allen Simpson, and I have offended guys at wp:cfd with renaming their own cfd categories without consensus (I think they are still not over it, even though I was a relative newbie at the time). And a few more minor edit wars. I tend to be too sure of myself. Even if I see reason in the end. Debresser (talk) 21:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, if you change your mind (and are prepared for a rough first RfA that you might very well fail), feel free to drop by in a few months when you think enough time has passed. Cheers, Amalthea 22:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the good word. Debresser (talk) 00:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

More light relief

Tell me if this gets boring, I know you said you didn't much like poetry, so apologies. Check out my user page. --John (talk) 04:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Certainly not boring, but I won't be able to appreciate it as you seem to do. :) Cheers, and have a pleasant day, Amalthea 08:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think that I understand this one ...
Amalthea 10:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

thank you

that was so nice of you Eli+ 15:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, it happened to still be on my watchlist and I noticed it was giving you trouble. It sure is a freakishly complex template. :) Cheers, Amalthea 15:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your edit to {{Talkback}}. I had been nudging there for some time, but I had to figure it all out by myself. Then I had to nudge on their talkpages to get their comments on my proposal, and in the end it likely would have taken an {{editprotected}} to get that change implemented. Debresser (talk) 14:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Not sure why I didn't notice when you first brought it up in September. Amalthea 14:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Mistake

I made a mistake in {{Tfd}}. I will change it on the talkpage now. Please remove "|OtherTemplate" from both lines. So sorry. Debresser (talk) 14:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed by the edit conflict when I wanted to tnull the editprotected. :) Amalthea 14:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping to outrun you... :) Debresser (talk) 14:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Small chance of that, I had opened the edit interface right away to copy your changes: I don't usually trust requested template changes enclosed in pre tags, some things like entities and the <nowiki> tag are still interpreted as usual. Amalthea 14:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I know and agree with you. If there were any special characters I would have warned. Debresser (talk) 14:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but you did, if I had copied it as displayed at Template talk:Tfd I would have lost the <nowiki>s around the ~~~~ and left my signature in the template. :) Amalthea 15:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Good thing you had a look. Debresser (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

[8]. Debresser (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Your opposition on Tlsp

Your opposition on Template_talk:Tlsp#Request is surely unjustified. Would you be willing to test that? You can make the template

{{[[Wikipedia:Template substitution|subst]]:[[{{ns:Template}}:{{{1|Tlsp}}}|{{{1|Tlsp}}}]]{{#if:{{{2|}}}||{{{2}}}}}{{#if:{{{3|}}}||{{{3}}}}}{{#if:{{{4|}}}||{{{4}}}}}{{#if:{{{5|}}}||<i>etc.</i>[[:Category:Tlsp test5]]}}{{#if:{{{subst|}}}||subst={{{subst}}}}}}}<noinclude>
{{Documentation}}
</noinclude>

Which will add any page using the fifth parameter to a to be made Category:Tlsp test5. And if any will show up (apart from the one I worked on yesterday), we will check them together. It is not that the workaround will not work, apart from lacking some elegance, but I think that if you object on such loose reasoning and torpedo my editprotected request, you have a responsibility to show that you did so for a good reason. And it won't hurt the template. Debresser (talk) 08:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow. "Torpedo your request"? Having a bad faith day? I believe I proposed just that kind of conditional categorization to find templates using parameter five (parameter six should also be categorized if we're already at it) before making a controlled change. Just watching the category won't be enough, it will require null edits to all 1500+ translucing pages to populate the category.
I have also not abandoned your request, so discussing a way forward should still happen at the template talk page. As I said, and as you saw at User talk:MSGJ, I was waiting for Martin or someone else to have a look and say if I'm being unreasonable or not. Amalthea 10:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry. I'm not taking it that hard. Want to run the test, or want to wait for other input? Running the test shouldn't be a problem. And I think you are mistaken about the need to null-edit. I have changed a template sorting over 2900 pages into a certain category yesterday, and within five minutes they were all there. Debresser (talk) 11:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I've added the categories. And yes, one would think that the "refreshLinks" job which is supposed to be started when a transcluded page is changed should take care of this, but in my experience it doesn't update the "categorylinks" table, although the source says it should. We'll see. Currently, the documentation page and the template page claim to be in the category, but aren't. Dito my test page. If they aren't till tonight, I'll null edit the whole bunch.
Cheers, Amalthea 07:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, still none in Category:Template:Tlsp usages with five parameters or Category:Template:Tlsp usages with six parameters. Amalthea 08:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I have null-edited the pages I was working on and Template:Tlsp/doc, and they are now in the categories. I agree it is strange we should have to null-edit them. Usually they get added pretty fast. I recently had 2900+ pages added within 5-7 minutes. Debresser (talk) 10:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't get it then. Job queue seems to be relatively short (at least as far as Special:Statistics can be trusted), so I don't think that it's just the job's priority that keeps it delayed. I just found Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Null edit bot, which more or less says that nobody seems to know why it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. :\
Amalthea 11:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Advisor.js

Thanks, Amalthea. I'm sorry about not checking, because I usually do. I think I got distracted by the edits to the infobox picture, and tracking who changed it, when, and why it was changed at those times. I will redouble my efforts to be sure to check advisor's changes. --Born2flie (talk) 10:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I just wanted to point it out, it has happened to me as well. Cheers, Amalthea 10:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

RFA spam

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 18:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

September MOTD

Mass\batch delete please. Also, i hope it doesn't bother you that i come here now every month for the same request for each month. Simply south (talk) 20:23, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course not, that's what I'm here for. All gone. Cheers, Amalthea 21:09, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Wow, you're like my guardian angel. I seem to be ruffling feathers here and there, because I'm trying to stand up and do the right thing. Some people apparently resent that. Thank you for backing me up...I really appreciate it. -Jordgette (talk) 22:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I happened to have you talk (and user) page on my watchlist since you had a problem with Twinkle a while ago.
I saw no resentment in this case by the way, simply a mistaken warning. Cheers, Amalthea 20:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle and image tagging

Hello, I've learned recently that there is still a bug with adding image deletion tags to captions within articles, in that an extra | is added that hides the preexisting caption. This was reported here, and seems related to this earlier bug report. I've tried raising this issue to a couple TW users, either by not using TW to tag images, or by going back to manually remove the extra |, but I unfortunately don't have a lot of faith that the effort will be put out to tag properly. Would it be possible to disable image tagging until this bug is addressed? Failing that, is there a good method of presenting this information to all TW users so that (the conscientious ones, at least) will correct for the bug? Postdlf (talk) 04:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, took care of it there, thanks. Amalthea 19:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response! Postdlf (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you're welcome. Amalthea 16:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Editprotected

How about say you do the 5 editprotected requests I have put up (2 citation templates, 3 FUR templates)? Sorry for pushing myself, but part of them have been up for over two days now. And all has been tested and discussed extensively. :)

I have replied to your question on Template:Album cover fur. Debresser (talk) 14:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, the FUR templates have been changed. Can you spot check if they work as intended?
Also, I've somewhere read a comment from you about the trouble of categorizing the outdated use of the parameter. You can check whether a parameter hasn't been provided at all or has been provided with an empty value by using
  {{#ifeq: {{{para|a}}} | {{{para|b}}} | {{#if:{{{para|}}} | parameter provided, and non-empty | parameter provided, but empty}} | Parameter was not provided at all}}.
You run into trouble of course if a template is transcluded in another template which pipes through some parameters, you'll then have to make more sophisticated checks and changes, like {{WPBannerMeta}} does.
Amalthea 14:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I'll check them. I am even aware of a potential issue. And eh, the dot in Template:Album cover fur was a mistake. Debresser (talk) 14:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

And I missed something in Template:Logo fur. Don't know how that happened. See the sandbox. Debresser (talk) 14:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Tested and working fine. Debresser (talk) 14:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Agree. That the dot seems superfluous. Debresser (talk) 14:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

It is a pleasure to work with you. My suggestions at Template_talk:Coord#Undefined_parameters were also implemented which added marvelous possibilities to that template. Would you like to implement my fixes to {{Citation}} and {{Citation/core}} as well? Debresser (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I've replied there, and typically keep all pages I edit on my watchlist, so you don't have to notify me here unless you think I missed or forgot something. Or something is very urgent, of course. Difficult things like this one might take me a while to get around to though anyway. Amalthea 15:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Make Me and Number Ones (Janet Jackson album)

There was edit waring when the subject was still "iffy" over these releases (much like Rihanna) but I believe there is sufficient third party coverage at this point in time to restore these pages. Thoughts? The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. Normally, you should talk to the admin who protected it directly who'll have a better insight into what it was all about. Seems clear cut to me in this case, so I unprotected it.
Cheers, Amalthea 11:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I missed "Make Me". Has that one charted, or gotten significant coverage about itself? From a glance I saw only quite trivial mentions of the song. Amalthea 11:39, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

It hasn't charted yet, but its gotten coverage since its debut. Thanks. I'll update the pages. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you see it passing WP:NSONGS? As I said, I only see mentions of it, but I haven't looked hard. It has never been to AfD, but without even one good source or a position on some chart I'd expect it to either snow at AfD or that we again end up with revert warring at the page. Amalthea 12:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm. The song had a lot of commentary since it came out prior to the info on the album, but it hasn't charted yet. I'll detail the basic info on the album page first, then I'll dig for sources on the song. For now I suppose it can stay as a redirect. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 12:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Amalthea 18:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

It would appear the single has charted on the Japan Hot 100 according to Billboard. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, unprotected. Not sure if Japan Hot 100 is considered enough, but it should be indication enough to prevent further edit warring. Thanks, Amalthea 08:53, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna's fourth album

The wrong title has been installed again, and the CSD tag has been removed by a suspicious looking anon. I'm at revert limit on the article.—Kww(talk) 17:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Weird that JGab12 didn't even reply to my notes on his talk page, he seems to be an established editor. Hmm. Anyway, left some hidden comments in the page pointing at the CNN story mentioning that it isn't the title, I expect that's going to be sufficient. I hope Rihanna's marketing people are at least kicking themselves for releasing such an ambiguous tease, my first thought was that it was going to be the title, too. Cheers, Amalthea 18:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a sock of User:Pretzky, took me a bit to figure it out. Cheers, Amalthea 20:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the page, an IP keeps removing the SD template, and I don't want to handle it myself since I've nominated half a dozen incarnations myself and circumstances have changed enough that a new AfD is required anyway. We shouldn't have an article on it yet per WP:MUSIC since there is still pretty much squat to tell about the album, but it's really tilting at windmills: it may be more sensible to keep it contained there. Amalthea 20:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Is there some css to stop text-shadowing?

^^^ ? –xeno^talk 14:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

--Amalthea 14:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

		The Minor Barnstar
		For all the little things you do, to make my (and I'm sure others as well) Wikipedia experience just a little bit better. –xenotalk 14:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that's sweet. :) Amalthea 14:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Soooooo like, I have a really minor, cosmetic and slightly obsessive-compulsive request, can you make Template:Breadcrumb look exactly like our actual breadcrumbs look like? I had trouble finding the right formatting. –xeno^talk 18:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

How "exactly" does it have to be? Would something like User:Amalthea2 suffice, which is a fair bit lower than the normal breadcrumb nav? And how bummed are you if it's not completely valid XHTML? How important is it that it looks correct if you're looking at old revisions (compare this with the real thing? To get it exactly right would require javascript in MediaWiki:Common.js, for which you'd have to find a pretty good rationale. :) --Amalthea 19:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Heh! I was more looking for the font-size to be a little closer than it is now! But ++points for thoroughness =) –xeno^talk 19:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Voila! Thanks again =) –xeno^talk 19:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, not sure what skin you're using, but it's right on top the header links for me. I normally avoid absolute positioning like the plague on Wikipedia since with all those skins and other things like sitenotices and the new-messages banner, you always get into trouble eventually. Amalthea 19:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yea I'm on plain old monobook. Did a preview in vector and it's bad. So, I'll ponder what to do. Thanks for the tips! –xeno^talk 19:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Btw, I second that barnstar xeno gave you. Great job as always :-) Regards SoWhy 19:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

You're sweet, too. ;) Amalthea 19:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Deleted user pages request

Hi -- A while ago I retired, and requested deletion of all my user pages. You answered the call (thank you, I'm sure I never said that), and at the time you said you'd be willing to restore those pages if I ever came back. Well I'm back, and would like to request just that :)

• User:Equazcion/s
• User:Equazcion/ubx
• User:Equazcion/Navbar

That's all for now, though I might request a couple more once "navbar" is restored, as I don't remember what links were there. It won't be much though, perhaps another 3 pages.

Thank you in advance :) Equazcion (talk) 05:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, restored. You can see the rest of the pages in this list, I can also restore the whole lot of them if you like.
Cheers, Amalthea 08:49, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that list. Only thing I need there is User talk:Equazcion/Archive index. I'd also like the other talk archives, but they don't appear to have been deleted by you. They were named User talk:Equazcion/Archive 1, etc, and there were probably 5 or 6 of them, though I don't remember exactly. If you can restore those too I'd appreciate it, and that's probably the last thing I'll bother you about. :) Thanks again. Equazcion (talk) 16:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Four, apparently, Archive 5 has no log entry. I've also restored User talk:Equazcion/header, which was referred to in the index. Cheers, Amalthea 16:48, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for all your help :) Equazcion (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Your comment on Materialscientist's talk page

Please honor my request to you Jcwf (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Replied there. Besides the points I listed there, I find it also rather amusing that you perceive an attempted infringement of freedom of speech, and counter with a "request" that I shouldn't exercise my freedom of speech to make suggestions.
Regards, Amalthea 20:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Citation/core

Perhaps you want to use Template:Citation/core/sandbox3 and make another testcases page. I'd go there myself, but that would break all the links in the discussion. BTW, note my question there about where the |Archive= parameter was deprecated. I plan to do extensive testing of {{Cite web}} and {{Cite book}} also, so I need my version of Citation/core. Debresser (talk) 08:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Can we keep the discussion in one place, please? Can you say there whether my version misses any change you were trying to make? Amalthea 08:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I'll wait for you to finish polishing your version. Would you do Template_talk:Citation_error#Tweak_wording in the mean time perhaps? Debresser (talk) 08:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks for the fix to {{Citation error}}. I agree with you about not adding the dot, as I have said there alsoo.

On a semi-personal note, I think you are making the error code too fancy, and too hard to understand for other editors as well. Debresser (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was torn between building it as one expression, or ripping all the different cases into a big switch statement. And when I started, I thought it'd be prettier this way ... :)
It's a hard thing to build those sentences with proper grammar in wikicode. Amalthea 12:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I think your last change to Citation/sanbox broke the link in the words "the original" in testcase #3. Could that be? Apart from that it works. Debresser (talk) 12:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC) No, your right. Because there is no url there. So that's it then. Debresser (talk) 12:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Man, you really like to spread discussions about. :)
I've replied at Template talk:Citation/core. Amalthea 12:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I dislike cluttering the general talkpage with small details that will be fixed in a sec. And this alerts users more efficiently. Debresser (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Two users in one system

hi amalthea i am sharing my apartment with my friend. He started a Wikipedia account.will that cause any problem if so Wat i must do. Should my friend stop using his account or any other options —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnu308 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello.
An account may only be used by one person, so your friend should register his own, and if you're sharing a computer as well, please make sure to always log out of your accounts. If you want to prevent any future issues, I would recommend that you both declare each other's user names on your user pages. That way, it is clear to everyone from the start should there ever be confusion about it. In addition, it would probably be a good idea if you tried avoiding each other if it comes to disputes or consensus finding discussions. It's not forbidden that you both take part in them, and if you declare your accounts on your user pages it's not a policy violation, but you'll prevent any allegations if you manage to avoid such situations in the first place.
You can find more details on it at WP:ROOMMATE.
Regards, Amalthea 11:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually we use same computer so same IP address.But account are different.His user name is joe3b3 logged in his email id. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnu308 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

As I said, if you declare it on your user pages, if possible with a direct link to User:joe3b3 and User:Sunnu308, and can avoid overlap in disputes, you'll be fine and have nothing to worry about. Amalthea 16:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

cite web etc.

Hi. I have reverted your edits because they broke most citations on Wikipedia. Rettetast (talk) 15:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Eeh? I think only because it took me forever to get them through! The core template has been changed as well, was the last one I changed (since I thought it would show the least issues in the meantime), and really have been tested well. Do you happen to have one such broken citation still opened? Amalthea 15:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Here are the cite web testcases, for example: {{Cite web/testcases}}. Can you reproduce one of the issues you saw there? Amalthea 15:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(ECx2) Was going to inform you I asked someone to revert you for citenews but was EC. While I don't have a sample still open to let you know what happened, every instance of citenews behaved as it was an archived citation (gave two copies of the same URL i.e. xxx archived from xxx) and gave an error about the lack of archivedate Nil Einne (talk) 15:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

It does still seem to be broken, I'm seeing several spurious reference errors on Imperial War Museum Duxford, no archive parameters in the references, yet being treated as an archived link missing its archivedate. Hohum (talk) 15:09, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(Ec) Hmm, I really think it must have been only during the transition. Darn, I didn't expect it'd take me so long to push them all through, I had all edits prepared but got lots of timeouts since presumably the database was busy.
We're now in some in-between state since citation/core is still modified. I am convinced that if I restored the actual citation changes, we'd be good again. Does anyone object if I prove it with e.g. cite news? Amalthea 15:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

OK to me. Rettetast (talk) 15:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

While no objection my suggestion would be Template:Cite mailing list or something may be a better test case as I presume it's used a lot less then citenews Nil Einne (talk) 15:16, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, will do that one. Amalthea 15:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(ECx3) What Nil Einne said. Every citation included the warning Error: You must specify the date the archive was made using the |archivedate= parameter.. Imperial War Museum Duxford seems fine to me now, try purging. Rettetast (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Imperial War Museum Duxford seems good now, didn't need to purge. Hohum (talk) 15:16, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

(ec) I've copied over that page into Amalthea/Sandbox and replaced all citation templates by their sandbox versions, and it's looking good. I'm going to switch one now, change explicitly if it's breaking something, and the rest if it's good.
Sorry for the trouble, I thoughz I had it prepared as well as I could. :\ Amalthea 15:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

← Changed {{Cite mailing list}} looks good, no visually discernible change in the two examples I checked, so I'll do the rest now. Slowly, though. Amalthea 15:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I have done {{Cite conference}} Rettetast (talk) 15:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, all changed. Of course, this time I didn't get any delays or database errors, had it worked like that the first time hardly anyone would have noticed :(
Sorry for mistake, and thanks all for helping fix it.
Amalthea 15:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

← Good. I have no idea what we accomplished with the edits but I trust it was for the good. Thanks. Rettetast (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh well. Long and boring discussion at Template talk:Citation/core#Error messages, mostly about confusing and incorrect error messages with incorrect categorization when using the archive parameters. That, and minor tweaks. Amalthea 15:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Congratulation, Amalthea, on a fine job! Debresser (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Opinions differ on that, I'm afraid. Amalthea 16:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I saw nobody who understood what has happened, but no negative reactions also. At least not after they understood that it takes time to make all the changes. Debresser (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

At the very least my reaction is negative, I'm kicking myself that I didn't actually test which edit should be made first. Amalthea 16:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, who do you think is the wikignome who takes care of Category:Articles with broken citations? Debresser (talk) 16:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Have fun :) Amalthea 16:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

And tell me, from what you have seen on all these testcases, are there more or less error messages now? Debresser (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Can't say if it's more or less, it's hard to extrapolate that from testcases to reality, but they will be correct now. I'm guessing you'll have more in the category since {{citation}} and {{cite press release}} didn't categorize properly thus far. Amalthea 16:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Correct. I have 1200+ now, but most of them are false alarm and are fixed with a null-edit. BTW, did you see that Category:Pages using deprecated citation archive is empty. I emptied it with 16 null-edits. That gives good hopes that it will stay empty. Debresser (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I have it open in a tab here, saw that I could kick out one random sample with a null edit, and assumed that it will be cleared soon. Let's give it a few weeks and then remove the parameter from the template. It can probably be removed from the documentation right away, but it won't make much difference, if anyone builds a new citation template around core they will probably model it after an existing one anyway. Amalthea 16:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Down to almost 200 now. With only a few edits by me. So that was probably the jobqueue. But maybe somebody is helping out. Debresser (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Nobody heplping out, just the job queue. Fixed some 170. Done. There were several different types of errors, which kept it interesting. And of the more recurrent types give me an idea for updating the documentation. Where can I discuss that issue centrally? Debresser (talk) 02:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

WT:CITET looks good. Amalthea 07:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a request. It used to be that in {{Cite web}} when there was no title, I would still be able to see the url. Now this is gone, see 2000 PBA All-Filipino Cup. The way it was was easy, because that would allow me to rightclick it and look up the title. Is there a possibility to add the url in front of the error message? Debresser (talk) 17:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I still see the URL, right behind the error message. Amalthea 17:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, only the original though, not the archive URL. You need that one as well? How are the other ones behaving in that regard? Amalthea 17:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Scratch that, the archive url in your example was commented out. See also the Template:Cite web/testcases. Amalthea 17:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I do too. It was on the next line with me (small screen), and I missed it. Archive was commented out by me, but is there also when not commented out. Sorry to bother. Debresser (talk) 17:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Fourth studio album

Looks like all links to the AFD are gone. Was that intentional?—Kww(talk) 16:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't me (ETA: or was it? Might have happened with the history merge.) but you're right, I missed that, I will restore them. But honestly, I can't see it being deleted, since it's now got both title and single: http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2009/10/20/rihanna-teams-with-ne-yo-for-ominous-rated-r-single-russian-roulette/
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 16:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Amalthea/Sandbox

I believe your article Amalthea/Sandbox has been mistakenly saved to the main namespace. -Canglesea (talk) 03:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I was in a hurry when I saved it. :\ Cheers, Amalthea 07:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

unnecessarily edits

I want u to check on this guy MamaPaiya. he just makes unnecessarily edits like deleting entire filmography from an article Joseph Vijay . He may not like that actor but he cant delete filmography of an actor,it is like destroying the article. This person has done many edits before in this article which are biased to another actor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnu308 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

You've already undone the section blanking, seems like it was just a mistake. Amalthea 13:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Need Help with Our Company Listing at Wikipedia

Amalthea:

We need to have our company listing at Wikipedia updated, and we want the page to be in compliance with all Wikipedia guidelines.

Are you available (for a modest fee) to update our page for us.

Alec

Please respond to me at alecs@att.net. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.182.178 (talk) 18:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Is that for AT&T? Your IP doesn't appear to be one of theirs. What kind of update do you have in mind? Amalthea 13:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Amalthea. I noticed that you cleaned away some vandalism on my talk page, while I was (kind of still am) on wikivacation. You used this edit comment: "rvv (hope you don't mind, David)"

So I just wanted to pop in and say I don't mind at all, you are welcome to revert vandalism anywhere, at any time. Thanks for keeping watch!

--David Göthberg (talk) 20:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Some people like to take care of vandalism or attacks on their talk pages themselves, that's why I asked. Cheers, Amalthea 13:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

New article name here

I'm just looking at New article name here from a non-admin account, and the result of what you did is equivalent to page protection: I can't create that page. I'm fine with that, but it would be a lot cleaner to achieve the same result with actual page protection, because then we wouldn't have the deletion log transcluded confusingly at the top. What do you think? Rd232 ^talk 11:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi
The page is still protected, actually (you've protected it yourself). I don't think there's a way to suppress the deletion log on the page (besides gross HTML/CSS hacks), but I haven't checked beyond the respective MediaWiki message. Amalthea 13:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I meant just put the notice in mainspace, protected. The deletion log bothers me. Rd232 ^talk 16:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

How about starting anew with Enter your new article name here, fully protected from the start? :) Amalthea 16:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Well I suppose that's the simplest... :) Rd232 ^talk 16:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

If you do that, don't forget to move the Editnotice and to change the title in the messages. --Amalthea 17:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Done that. Don't think I broke anything... Rd232 ^talk 16:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Death of Marwa El-Sherbini

Thanks for fixing the dates. I've reread the WP:MOS and yes this looks now proper. Many thanks. Mootros (talk) 01:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, thanks for writing the article! And I hope you didn't mind my moving the multiline references to the bottom. I find that the source text gets much more readable and manageable that way, but some editors aren't so happy about that.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea 09:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

How do I get my article live

How do I get my article liveAnnrol (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)annrol

Hello, Annrol, and welcome to Wikipedia.
The article you've developed on your user page would probably best be located at William Arthur (company), with the redirect at William Arthur turned into a disambiguation page. If you click on that red link, you get to the editing window where you can put your article. Alternatively, you can also move your userpage there using the "move" tab at the top, but please make sure you untick the "Move associated talk page" checkbox.
What I would ask you to do first though is to click through the Article Wizard, which will give you a couple of pointers to improve the article. Most importantly, you should do two things:

1. Add a sentence at the very top of the article that saying what your article is about, and why its topic is important. Have a look at other articles on companies, it will typically start with "William Arthur is an American ... company".
2. Try to add references to reliable sources supporting the information in your article. Online news sources are usually best, but everything considered reliable is good: books, newspapers, …. I don't know where you got the facts for your article, if you only harvested their publications, you should still try and get at least one reliable source covering the topic in detail. Inline citations are best, or just create a section called "References" and place your sources there.

I'm recommending this because Wikipedia has inclusion guidelines for its articles. The article should at least give an indication why this topic may be important enough for an encyclopedic article. From a glance at google news, I see a number of mentions, but not exactly any in-depth coverage – but your topic is not easy to search for. You can have a look at the notability requirements for companies at WP:Notability (organizations and companies).
If you have any questions, feel very free to ask.
Kind regards, Amalthea 19:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see now that you've already added your reference to the article. Some more things regarding that:
If you work for the company, you'll have a conflict of interest with the article. You can still edit the article, but you need to take extra care to present the topic from a neutral point of view. WP:NPOV is one of Wikipedia's core policies; only using the Employee's Handbook as a source is conflicting with that, since the company will of course try to present itself in a positive way. That shines through into the article, by your choice of words: "accomplished graphic artist", "a talent for designing", "the finest stores", "saw an opportunity" – all of this sounds like coming straight from a company brochure, and needs to be changed or supported by a reference to an independent, reliable source supporting it.
Amalthea 20:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)