User talk:Lar/Archive 3
|
I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 1 March 2006 through about 1 April 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thanks! edit
Thank you for your kind words! Nach0king 09:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
User talk:JzG edit
I told you it would only be a matter of time before something interesting came up Lar! Check out User:Mrs Gastrich and her RFA! :-) --kingboyk 19:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
RFA question edit
Just wanted to let you know I answered your question at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cyde. Thanks. --Cyde Weys 23:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support edit
Thank you for supporting me in my request for adminship! It ended with a tally of 39/5/4, and I am now an admin. I'm glad to have earned the trust of the community, and I will make use of it responsibly. Of course, you can let me know of any comments or concerns you have.
With a million articles in front of me, I'd better get mopping.
My "non-article" edit
Less cats, huh? I don't think it's ready to be moved out into article space yet. Maybe if I get the book I'm writing published it will make sense to have it out there, but for now I'm quite happy being just a harmless "non-notable" :) Grutness...wha? 07:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Action on DYK medal edit
Hi, after lots of fits and starts, consensus has emerged that DYK medal is a good idea and a design is being voted on. As a person actively involved in prior discussions, you may want to join in there. TIA, --Gurubrahma 18:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Question edit
I imagine you have my page on watch on Lar, but if not there's a question for you at User_talk:Kingboyk#Pavel_Tsatsouline. --kingboyk 18:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm edit
My RFA is still open but block and delete buttons have just appeared. Guess I joined the cabal! :P --kingboyk 17:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC) All official now. It's a bit spooky having the extra buttons. 'Block' the crat who promoted me?! Rollback Lar? Scary! --kingboyk 17:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Invitation edit
Wotcha! Thanks for the invite, I have to say though that my knowledge of The Beatles is somewhat limited to all things "official", i.e. no good with things like bootlegs etc, but well versed in all their official rare Brit. albums and singles - also met George once, spoke to him for well over an hour, he was a really great bloke (for a Scouser!), no, only joking he was great, he was my favourite Beatle. Tell me, am I being thick, but what do I have to do to join? Be Lucky, Lion King 20:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for the note. I am just a fan, there is lots to do that is organizational and cleanup related... don't need to know every last detail. To join, sign your name on the list of members, (see Wikipedia:WikiProject_The_Beatles#Participants) and (optionally) add the template to your user page. (see Wikipedia:WikiProject_The_Beatles#Membership_template)... then start participating on the talk page to help us figure out what needs doing most, and dig in and do it! Hope that helps, if not, please ask again. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 21:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I can see you're going at that like a man on fire, and you have it marked "inuse", so I'll have the new message thing flash up :) -
- Don't forget to have colours or gradings for 'merge candidates', 'deletion candidates' and 'merge or delete candidates'. The Beatles aren't excluded from normal Wikipedia rules and conventions, and there's a lot of - frankly - cruft like Day by Day (music) out there. For a start, I can grade that one right now: m/d. --kingboyk 02:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Answered on the project talk page... (the man on fire bit is work avoidance! I did get one deliverable done though...) ++Lar: t/c 02:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
4DL programming language edit
Ok, userfied to User:Lar/4DL programming language. Standard warning on use of deleted content apply (i.e. that some people don't like it so much and that you must retain the userfied article for GFDL purposes following any merge). Little did I realise that that AfD was only the first of many bulk esoteric language nominations... -Splashtalk 20:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
(answered where I started the thread)
Award edit
—pschemp 00:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi again, dear Larry! edit
Hi, my sweet Larry! Boy, I've missed you so much, it's so good to see you once again! Thank you so much for your get well wishes, it's not that serious, only very annoying... writing with one hand makes it real hard to write more than 5 lines :( Anyway, you've left me many messages while I was away, so I'll just say "thank you!" for all the beautiful things you've taken he time to say regarding my humble participation in Kingboy's successful RfA - although I sincerely believe it was him who earned the promotion, not me who made it possible by merely nominating him; he truly deserved it. And allow me to tell you, congrats on the new Beatles project! That's great news, lathough I'm not quite a fan of the Liverpool bunch, watching new excelent projects like this (especially in the hands of great editors like you two) fills me with joy. Regarding the creation of Categories - I'm so sorry, hun, but the ones at my own project were created by hand in full, so I have no idea of a general tool hat could help you there :( I know, it's a pain, but in our case, most were already created, and we merely had to polish them a bit - again, I'm sorry I can't give you a hand (just to make fun of myself for a moment ;)
It's so soothing to me to see you again, dear Larry. I hope I'll be able to stick around on a more regular basis, as I don't have to report again until my hand's a little better - despite the effort it represents to write in this state :/ Thousand kisses, please msg me whenever you want - I'll be here. Kisses! Phædriel ♥ tell me - 00:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
RFA Thanks edit
 |
Thank you! Thank you for your support in my recent RFA. It passed 53/1/2 and I am now an administrator. I appreciate that some of you made exceptions to your usual requirements re length of service and so on because we've interracted positively in the past, or because of my credentials, so I will endeavour to use my new mop cautiously. I'm always open to feedback and gently constructive criticism. If you're not an admin and need some assistance do of course please let me know. Thanks again --kingboyk 00:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC) |
P.S. If you are interested in The Beatles, User:Lar has asked me to tag on a little note advertising the creation of a new Beatles WikiProject that we are currently setting up. Please sign up and help.
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article The Observatory (band), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
hi Larry, I had to reword it as their first album is a red link - also only free images are used on DYK, mainpage. --Gurubrahma 13:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hey thanks... one thing is that I hadn't made the album name a link because it indeed is a redlink, both albums are described in the band article itself, this band may not be "big" enough (per WP:MUSIC) to justify separate album articles. I suppose I could have given a # link into the section about the album? ++Lar: t/c 14:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- AFAIC, a generally released album by a notable band is notable in itself, period. AFD usually goes the same way. In this case however I'd recommend retaining your current configuration for now. Why have 3 stubs instead of the one good article you already have? --kingboyk 18:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Re:WikiProject Beatles template edit
Looks good! I've added my name to the list of participants. Not sure how much time I'll get to participate, but I'll do what i can :) Grutness...wha? 23:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- PS - thought you'd like to see what I put on the Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles page re: stub templates (I'm a very active member of WP:WSS, and if necessary can quote chapter and verse :) Grutness...wha? 23:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Cool, no need to quote, I take you at your word! I see you uncommented the boilerplate stuff I had commented out. I see no issue with using specific stubs if there's a need. (just as long as SPUI doesn't turn up and start a range war or something!) Welcome to the project! Whatever you can do is great. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 01:03, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks... edit
...for stepping in on my talkpage. FWIW, I have responded to him again with the diffs - you may want to have a looka t my reply on his talkpage. --Gurubrahma 03:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- No worries... In fact thank YOU... You (there) said "The objective of FAs is to display the best work of the community; that of DYKs is to invite others to improve the articles." I gotta remember that quote, it's SO true! ALL the DYK's I've had selected have been remarkably improved by the time they rolled off again. This one is no exception... Dodo bird asked about the press pack aspect, and after we dialogued a bit, he went to town on the band and discography section and changed them around to make them a LOT better (and less press-packy). I tried to engage with Phr but to no avail yet. Thanks again and happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 03:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Did You Know? edit
Since you are a big DYK fan: is DYK (being on the front page and all that) toned down/censored? If not, 1987: What The Fuck Is Going On? which I created on the 4th has some interesting stuff about them burning their debut album (something of a prelude to burning a million quid a few years later). It's rather full of bad language I'm afraid. --kingboyk 03:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Lar, just a courtesy note to tell you that I reverted your recent reversion at The Beatles. The IP seems to be a genuine contributor (I checked the last few contribs and they're all fine), and we mustn't frighten new users off by reverting their edits without explanation if they're well meaning. I actually think (s)he is right, too - the song (s)he changed has no link, and Get Back ought to be on the list. --kingboyk 04:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- No worries, on reflection I agree, I added "I Me Mine", back in though. (my decision to revert wasn't knee jerk, it was based on reviewing the earlier contributions which were spamcrufty... but you're prolly right) HOWEVER, honestly now, did that move the article closer to FA or closer to Class-A ? (snicker!) ++Lar: t/c 04:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Wouldn't think it made any difference either way, and we mustn't scare the newbies. It's interesting, that guy is getting reverted all over the place, but check this for example: [1] and [2]. He was reverted for this but check this and Maple Leaf Gardens. There's a few edits where he might be sneaky-vandalising (i.e. I know nothing about the subjects and can't tell) but edits like this [3] suggest an enthusiastic youngster. --kingboyk 04:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe someone needs to take him under their wing, encourage him to get an id. Tangentially, while you are right, this comment "Why is everyone reverting this IP's edits without checking them? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060842482/104-6489782-3026305?v=glance&n=283155" might be interpreted as a bit "testy"... (just sayin') ++Lar: t/c 04:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't aimed at you (the Beatles edit was at least questionable). Don't you think it's bad to revert a newcomer without even the courtesy of checking the validity of their edit? I spent 30 seconds at Amazon and verified it. If there's one thing worse than being testy with an established user it's scaring the newbies. Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. --kingboyk 04:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, it's a shared IP address. I was gonna take up your excellent advice and offer a helping hand and a {{welcomeip}} message. Oh well. --kingboyk 05:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- I know it wasn't aimed at me. And ya, I totally do think it is bad to not check before reverting possibly questionable stuff. This newbie must be feeling pretty frustrated by now if he's noticed how much of his stuff isn't sticking. The newbies don't see the edit summaries, I'm thinking, which is a good thing, eh?. I totally agree that not biting is important. I'm just saying it read testy to me. No worries either way. Dropping a note to (whoever it was that you reverted, I forget, and it's not important to the theme of this reply) would have been way more work than just putting that in the edit summary, it is true. I figured we're getting to be friends enough that I could mention it without you getting upset though, else I wouldn't have. Tell you what, I'll buy you a pint next time I'm in the UK! Deal? ++Lar: t/c 05:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, it's a shared IP address. I was gonna take up your excellent advice and offer a helping hand and a {{welcomeip}} message. Oh well. --kingboyk 05:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't aimed at you (the Beatles edit was at least questionable). Don't you think it's bad to revert a newcomer without even the courtesy of checking the validity of their edit? I spent 30 seconds at Amazon and verified it. If there's one thing worse than being testy with an established user it's scaring the newbies. Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. --kingboyk 04:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe someone needs to take him under their wing, encourage him to get an id. Tangentially, while you are right, this comment "Why is everyone reverting this IP's edits without checking them? http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060842482/104-6489782-3026305?v=glance&n=283155" might be interpreted as a bit "testy"... (just sayin') ++Lar: t/c 04:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Wouldn't think it made any difference either way, and we mustn't scare the newbies. It's interesting, that guy is getting reverted all over the place, but check this for example: [1] and [2]. He was reverted for this but check this and Maple Leaf Gardens. There's a few edits where he might be sneaky-vandalising (i.e. I know nothing about the subjects and can't tell) but edits like this [3] suggest an enthusiastic youngster. --kingboyk 04:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Mediawiki edit
Sigh. Let this be confirmation that I've lost my way on my development projects. I've got one Mediawiki config file covering multiple sites, single login, I've made changes up to patch level 5, written an extension, and I can't remember how it works. [4] --kingboyk 20:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Um ya I hear you. I'll have to follow the Special:version link later... from here I get
Requesting Client IP: 138.12.170.164 Requested URL: http://test.wikihell.com/wiki/Special:Version Websense Category: Access denied by Websense content category. The requested URL belongs to the following category: Sex.
- Grin. ++Lar: t/c 20:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Huh?! It's a blank Mediawiki with a few skeleton pages about process. How bizarre! --kingboyk 21:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the headsup. Something else for my todo list! Your work related travels would suggest you are a rather accomplished IT professional. Do you ever use project management/planning software and if so which would you recommend? --kingboyk 21:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oh boy. You had to ask... I've been a program manager, and used to belong to PMI actually but I wanted to get back to more techy stuff, system architecture is my true love. I use project management software but not project planning software. I'm convinced you can only plan projects based on experience, and I use a bunch of excel spreadsheets specific to the sorts of projects I architect and gut feel when I have to give estimates. There are a lot of good project management softwares out there. I should put in a pitch for the Rational suite since I (now, thanks to an acquisition) work for IBM (again, my first 12 years in IT were with them). Lots of good stuff there in that suite. But what I use myself, believe it or not, is Microsoft Project. Not because it's good (it's fair at best, a lot of featurecruft that gets in the way, especially if you are trying to do effort driven planning rather than duration based) ,but because just about every client has it. Least common denominator and all that... User:Titoxd was asking me for help and could not believe that to do Java work I use the dos prompt and notepad (or the shell prompt and vi) rather than a fancy GUI. Again, least common denominator! I used to carry a vi cheat sheet around in my wallet. But I stopped because I never used all the commands. ++Lar: t/c 21:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I use vim for scripting, and Textpad (Windows) for HTML. I've recently learnt PHP and I use Zend Studio for that - auto-complete and colour coding are just too good to do without, I think. --kingboyk 21:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oh boy. You had to ask... I've been a program manager, and used to belong to PMI actually but I wanted to get back to more techy stuff, system architecture is my true love. I use project management software but not project planning software. I'm convinced you can only plan projects based on experience, and I use a bunch of excel spreadsheets specific to the sorts of projects I architect and gut feel when I have to give estimates. There are a lot of good project management softwares out there. I should put in a pitch for the Rational suite since I (now, thanks to an acquisition) work for IBM (again, my first 12 years in IT were with them). Lots of good stuff there in that suite. But what I use myself, believe it or not, is Microsoft Project. Not because it's good (it's fair at best, a lot of featurecruft that gets in the way, especially if you are trying to do effort driven planning rather than duration based) ,but because just about every client has it. Least common denominator and all that... User:Titoxd was asking me for help and could not believe that to do Java work I use the dos prompt and notepad (or the shell prompt and vi) rather than a fancy GUI. Again, least common denominator! I used to carry a vi cheat sheet around in my wallet. But I stopped because I never used all the commands. ++Lar: t/c 21:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Adminship edit
I hope I haven't let you down with my adminship since I have been promoted (apart from a couple of testy edit summaries). I meant what I said about feedback and gentle criticism.
- ?What brought that on? I've not been watching you closely (no reason to!) but I think the community totally did the right thing from what I've seen peripherally... if I see the need to slag you, you'll be the first to know, believe me. (see User_talk:Aaron_Brenneman/Archives/5#Trout_time... I've no qualms on that score.)
As for you, do you have any ambitions in that direction? --kingboyk 05:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- See WP:DFA... I used to be a sure no. Still leaning that way. Phaedriel called dibs on nominating me if I ever decide I want to be, if that was what you are asking. ++Lar: t/c 06:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- You gotta be kidding! I was just deciding how to word my oppose vote :P No, seriously, I did wonder - you've been here longer than me and do a great job. Sharon is a great nominator, but I'd happily support. I know about WP:DFA, hence my question. Best stick to the WikiProject, your articles, and real life now eh? --kingboyk 06:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- I may have joined before you but I didn't do much for quite a while... your edits vastly outstrip mine, and what's more, [5] you actually have more articles than any other category. I'm m:metapedian enough as it is. So, na. Maybe in a while. and thanks for the kind words. Dunno how great of a job it is though, I just got into a scuffle earlier today: April Fools Day Page... I have a long ways to go. ++Lar: t/c 06:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- You gotta be kidding! I was just deciding how to word my oppose vote :P No, seriously, I did wonder - you've been here longer than me and do a great job. Sharon is a great nominator, but I'd happily support. I know about WP:DFA, hence my question. Best stick to the WikiProject, your articles, and real life now eh? --kingboyk 06:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks edit
|
This user thinks it is ironic that thanks for supporting Cyde's successful RFA came in the form of a userbox. |
Here's a userbox for you. --Cyde Weys 04:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, for the encouragement. As for photos of chapter houses, I see what I can do. The next time I rember to bring a camera when I'm in Berkeley I'll take a picture of the old Hilgard house (and I'll insert the picture in History at the point where Hilgard was installed). I always drop by the old Hilgard house whever I go to a Cal game even though they were shut down two years before I was initiated. Back to the article, I would prefer to use one picutre of a house per region to spruce up the list of active chapters. The going has been slow lately, real life has been real busy but when I'm back from my spring training trip to Phoenix I should be able to finish the History section, I'm only planning to go to the point where Delta Sig (and the rest of the fraternities) gests re-integrated in the 1960's.
The work is a bit hard, because of NPOV and I need to avoid references to ritual. Even in Bonds of Brotherhood there are passages that allude to ritual.
Either way, I am leaving the article in a much better state than when I first found it.
(almost forgot to sign my name) Dspserpico 23:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC) Zeta Omicron (CSU, East Bay), '99
5 and 2/3 years edit
Nice! You should have recused yourself from that particular AfD debate. LOL! Crzrussian 16:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Re:Picture popups question edit
Picture popups show the same size of the image as the image page. With the latest version of mediawiki, you can change this size in your preferences. That should take care of most of your problems. ~~
Awww.... edit
Noo. Not cat hair. But here's some you may enjoy, for FREE!
· Katefan0(scribble)/poll 02:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[[Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of 
|Lar/Archive 3]]
See my user page, it's on there already... Right below the "this page needs less cats" box... Snicker. ++Lar: t/c 13:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Beatles Classification edit
Hi Lar, Wiki stalker/"DS" Steve here. Don't forget to add the project's template to the talk page of applicable articles when you assess them, and apply any small tweaks which are needed. --kingboyk 04:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Hullo edit
Hey mate. I wonder if you have time, would you help me with a problem I've noticed with the portal I created? Have a look at this discussion on Steve's page for me, and leave a message if you've any ideas. Cheers. --Mal 09:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Answered here: User_talk:Kingboyk#NI_Portal:_pics_not_displaying.3F Net net, I see it too, no idea why. ++Lar: t/c 11:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Lar - I reported the bug directly to BugZilla (which I was already apparently a member of, much to my surprise!). --Mal 14:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Beatles Project edit
Seems you first subst'd the skeleton project on the 4th March. Feels like months ago! We've made a good start, let's keep it up :) --kingboyk 05:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot edit
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways, from comparing articles that need work to other articles you've edited, to choosing articles randomly (ensuring that all articles with cleanup tags get a chance to be cleaned up). It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Successful RfA edit
| Thanks for your support and kind words on my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know. Cactus.man ✍ 07:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC) |
Thanks for the Feedback, but Watch Out! edit
Suggest you clarify edit comments in such was a re-rv in same; looking at (Diff) from your contribs, this edit had me convinced you were socketpuppet for user:xiong. Thanks for your comment, btw, talk: 1632 (novel). I'll think on your input, lean that way myself. Personally, enclopedic standard would eliminate most Pop entries in entirety, so the article would be speedy vote in WP:AFD fm me philosophically speaking. Not 'mature' enough to be noteworthy historically speaking. Unless I see some hope (and examples) that this sort of thing has chance at WP:FA, the book involves too much work to expand much farther. I feel like its waste of time. Got any answers on that concern? (FA examples)
- Hi, thanks for your comments. I am afraid I found them a bit hard to follow though... I think my edit comment regarding the reversion to Radiant!'s page was pretty clear. Mistaking me for a sockpuppet for anyone else would be quite a stretch once you looked at my contribution history so I have no worries on that score. As for 1632, probably best to discuss that on the article talk page. Happy editing. ++Lar: t/c 19:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- I looked at your contribs from there, saw the rv, took the diff, saw xiongs sig, so... seemed that way, then I checked, I think by looking at R!'s history. Your comment didn't make it clear the previous revert was being reverted so the xiong sig said you were the same.
- So I wasted 10 mins or so trying to figure out you had 'gimmicked' his sig. then reality intruded. so I dropped the note.FrankB 09:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the input [[Talk:1632_(novel)#Responses_to_Above_Feedback|See 1632] FrankB 20:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Talk about small world... you were posting your answer and (Refactoring or refractoring)(?Which is the term?) when I went to post below my short note above. Was in fact, ironically, going to comment on your page heading, in particular, you're Posting Convention Note. More Ironically as At least I see what some in wikiculture has been doing, OTHERWISE!, but your POV on the thread is good too. Think ringing the phone with a short notice is polite (See user_talk: Tony Sidaway Text search for 'CRAP'. <G>
- Infact, I just suggested to him that a userbox be created that essentially uses your message (minus Pooh <g>), for folks with your shared posting convention, as well as whatever others there are. If you don't mind some input, your page top is 'busy', and that message needs more prominence. In fact, I'm thinking of stealing the idea. But I'd reduce the clutter. My page head/top isn't pretty, but it's damn clear. I'll work on pretty!
- On the 'Socketpuppet' thing, I did check your contribs next, that's why my point was on the 're-rv' (or equivilent 'rv-rv' perhaps) in the comment. That would have been seen in both modes w/o confusion. NBD either way. I loose far more than ten minutes posting messages to people!
- See you whenever! FrankB 03:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Beatles Project Heads Up edit
Hi. A heads up. We've had a post on the talk page from a newbie who really wants to help but doesn't know where to start. S/he will need some handholding. Add that to a previous enquiry about how to help, and the general lack of edits from people besides us 3, and it's clearly time to look at offering out some tasks and maybe dropping a newsletter out to people. The newbie's post also needs a reply - I'm too tired to answer the post at the moment, so if you happen to be online and can deal it with that would be great. If not, let's talk on the project page tommorow or when you're next free. --kingboyk 21:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC) (in autopilot mode).
- Is this the post I answered with a quick recap, or a new one?... (went and checked, new... left a new message) I agree it's time to try to share out tasks, and that a newsletter might be the way to do it. I can take a crack at the newsletter but it may not be for a few days (I'll hang it as a subpage till we like it)... were there other tasks (besides more article classification tables) that you are waiting on me to do? ++Lar: t/c 21:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure mate, I'm a bit too tired to think. I'll finish my trawl through the redlinks list and then go to bed. Agreed re the newsletter. If you haven't already, might be best to drop the newbie a heads up on their talk page too. I don't know how green they are, but watchlists and the like may not have entered the equation just yet. Thanks Lar, I'll answer your question tomorrow. --kingboyk 21:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's only the classification tables Lar. There was the watchlist issue, but I'm a bit cold on that being within the classification tables right now. It might help if you made a totally flat list of our articles as you go, for use with the related changes feature and possibly for use as a watchlist check later on. Newsletter can wait. I'll have a start at the To-do template myself. Cheers. --kingboyk 11:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I had thought to just keep doing categories one by one as we identified then (but that does introduce duplication). A flat list might be better. The table ought to show, as a column, what categories the article was found in. Do you have a list somewhere of what all the categories you want included are? Not all of them have "beatles" in their name I don't think... I better get coding but it may not be for a few days.++Lar: t/c 15:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- All subcats of Category:The Beatles and the subcategories of the 4 members. All Apple except Category:Apple Corps images and (arguably) Category:Apple Records recording artists. Basically everything that is a subcat of the Beatles, with the exception of Apple images and the possible exception of Apple artists.
- Originally I'd felt the Apple artists were outside project scope, but I'm not sure now. I for one regard the Apple story as an integral part of the Beatles story, and the category isn't very large.
- I've done a todo list, see Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/To do and various chat postings. --kingboyk 16:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I had thought to just keep doing categories one by one as we identified then (but that does introduce duplication). A flat list might be better. The table ought to show, as a column, what categories the article was found in. Do you have a list somewhere of what all the categories you want included are? Not all of them have "beatles" in their name I don't think... I better get coding but it may not be for a few days.++Lar: t/c 15:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's only the classification tables Lar. There was the watchlist issue, but I'm a bit cold on that being within the classification tables right now. It might help if you made a totally flat list of our articles as you go, for use with the related changes feature and possibly for use as a watchlist check later on. Newsletter can wait. I'll have a start at the To-do template myself. Cheers. --kingboyk 11:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure mate, I'm a bit too tired to think. I'll finish my trawl through the redlinks list and then go to bed. Agreed re the newsletter. If you haven't already, might be best to drop the newbie a heads up on their talk page too. I don't know how green they are, but watchlists and the like may not have entered the equation just yet. Thanks Lar, I'll answer your question tomorrow. --kingboyk 21:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Small article... edit
[6] big AFD discussions? :P Titoxd(?!? - help us) 01:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Um, I think I hang around with a different "they" than you do, because that wasn't the answer I got! But that IS a small article. And Bikini Model is redlinked. What a shame! (btw, see User:Lar/Domai.com ... I can't decide if making that article live in articlespace (once I make it coherent instead of just a bunch of random thoughts) "just because I can" (it has an alexa rank of 2.5K... tough to argue against that!) would be WP:POINT or not.) ++Lar: t/c 01:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
WP:RM edit
Hi! Please take a look at Talk:Tagus Bridge. Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
If OBJECTIVE: Christian Ministries is an organization (albeit a satirical one), why do they not qualify under CSD A7 simply because their organization is manifested in a web site? If someone writes JDoorjam and JDoorjam.com, the first a non-notable bio, and the second a JDoorjamcruft web site, you're saying that JDoorjam.com has to go through AfD? Or, better yet: a group of three checkers players in a suburb outside of wherever decide to form a club, the Non-Notable Checkers Club, and write an article about it. It gets speedily deleted under CSD A7. A month later they decide, due to the rank body odor of one of the members, to move their club online, and become the Non-Notable Online Checkers Club. You're saying that the NNOCC can't be speedily deleted, even though it's the same group of non-notable folks doing the same non-notable things in a digital medium? I see nowhere in the CSDs that exempts online organizations from qualifying for speedy deletion under CSD A7, and can think of no reason why they shouldn't, either. Please let me know where my misunderstanding is. Truly, JDoorjam Talk 23:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Lar is, as usual, totally correct. There is no current consensus regarding "non-notable" websites falling under that speedy deletion criterion. There are two reasons for this: 1) A website is not a group even if it's about a group, so it just wouldn't make sense, and 2) We don't see enough crap websites clogging up AfD for it to be required. - brenneman{L} 00:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you Aaron. JDoorham, I freely admit to being a bit intoxicated as I write this so let me apologise in advance if it lacks a certain, er, coherency... further I freely admin that I am a policy and process wonk. But that's because I am a firm believer that in the vast majority of cases, process, when followed, makes things fairer. The outcomes seem fairer, and they ARE fairer, because they are perceived as, and they ARE, more objective. So, while your argument may be persuasive, I think the place to make it is WP:CSD's talk page. Get the criteria augmented, rather than stretching them.
- That said, I'm not actually persuaded by it. CSD requires judgement and if it were me I'd only allow inclusionists to CSD things because erring on the side of caution is the best and most prudent approach. One should, in my view, never stretch criteria to fit... Unless it's stunningly cut and dried, CSD is not the way to go. Consider WP:PROD instead, or AfD. This one wasn't cut and dried. As soon as it appears on DRV, that's a sign that CSD wasn't stunningly cut and dried. No aspersion is intended, which is why I asked you to consider a slight change, not demanded! Hope that helps. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 01:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC) PS, I am perfectly fine with this being on the DRV page, not sure that it needed to be here (but no problem either way). Please feel free to refactor it there if you wish.
- I always refuse to speedy delete web sites and "companies" even if the latter is quite obviously not incorporated (and quite often against my judgement too). I've noticed a few getting deleted by other admins citing A7, but not many. The checkers club example would depend on the wording I think. If the new article was still about the group, but they're now an online group (who happen to have a website), A7 can apply. If the article is about their website, A7 does not apply. It seems kinda silly when put like that, but there ya go, that's how it is (or how I see it at least). --kingboyk 08:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- That said, I'm not actually persuaded by it. CSD requires judgement and if it were me I'd only allow inclusionists to CSD things because erring on the side of caution is the best and most prudent approach. One should, in my view, never stretch criteria to fit... Unless it's stunningly cut and dried, CSD is not the way to go. Consider WP:PROD instead, or AfD. This one wasn't cut and dried. As soon as it appears on DRV, that's a sign that CSD wasn't stunningly cut and dried. No aspersion is intended, which is why I asked you to consider a slight change, not demanded! Hope that helps. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 01:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC) PS, I am perfectly fine with this being on the DRV page, not sure that it needed to be here (but no problem either way). Please feel free to refactor it there if you wish.
Oops? edit
[7]. But I can't be stuffed right now fixing it up, I'm too busy with "natural, happy, pretty goddesses who enjoy that you are enjoying their beauty." - brenneman{L} 00:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- ?? Urf, what are you telling me? Is that my stuffup somehow? oh my!!! I think that was the day that WP was replacing entire articles with sections (see WP:VP, in the tech section about that time). At this point what is the easiest way to fix it??? It's stuffed up all right. and what is this: "natural, happy, pretty goddesses who enjoy that you are enjoying their beauty." from? Have you been reading my user pages or something? I've been drinking, and I am not sure I can fix it at the moment.++Lar: t/c 01:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Trying to fix it as we speak. What a messy job! ++Lar: t/c 02:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware of the technical issue, and thought that it was indeed an odd mistake for someone as experianced as yourself to make, sorry to cast aspersion! And a dedicated wikistalker like myself snoop through subpages? Never!
brenneman{L} 02:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)- Sorted now, (I'm not saying I am a better editor drunk than some people are sober, oh no, I'm not saying that...) I think. (does admin give you any better buttons in this area beyond simple revert?) but check my work! And, no, I didn't think you were casting aspersions my friend, far from it... As for Special Allpages, I've been known to look in there on people too you know. I need to clean my subpages out, I have a lot of article redirects left around that all need to start wearing {{Deletebecause}} as they're no longer needed... So taking as an assumption that you WERE snooping... about domai, do you think it would be WP:POINT if I cleaned it up and moved it to articlespace? Alexa rank has moved to 2400... —This unsigned comment was added by drunkLEGOfanatic (talk • contribs) .
- Well *cough* not that I know anything about it *cough* of of course had ever even heard of it before *cough* but the term DOMAI has become "genericised" to the point that I'd think an article could exist. A quick google-trawl however only finds one book [8] [9] and a possible mention that I'm unable to confirm at this time. Might I also say that whenever I see someone working on a new article in userspace I'm gripped by the compulsion to dash off a stub just to irritate them? - brenneman{L} 05:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hadn't figured you for a dirty OLD man, more of a dirty YOUNG man... no basis for that really, just a hunch. Besides this article would be about the website, not the neologism/dictdef. As for dashing off stubs? Trying to scare me, huh? Go for it... I'll just nom it for DYK, then dump all the unfinished notes and half formed sentences into your stub article and leave it all for you to sort out (and if you don't, AfD nom it as low quality work infested by sockpuppet added spamlinks). Finally, do you think that maybe I can get that book and tell Jo "it's all research for Wikipedia dear, honest... I explained to you how everything has to be verifiable, I'm just fact checking!" ?? ++Lar: t/c 05:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well *cough* not that I know anything about it *cough* of of course had ever even heard of it before *cough* but the term DOMAI has become "genericised" to the point that I'd think an article could exist. A quick google-trawl however only finds one book [8] [9] and a possible mention that I'm unable to confirm at this time. Might I also say that whenever I see someone working on a new article in userspace I'm gripped by the compulsion to dash off a stub just to irritate them? - brenneman{L} 05:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorted now, (I'm not saying I am a better editor drunk than some people are sober, oh no, I'm not saying that...) I think. (does admin give you any better buttons in this area beyond simple revert?) but check my work! And, no, I didn't think you were casting aspersions my friend, far from it... As for Special Allpages, I've been known to look in there on people too you know. I need to clean my subpages out, I have a lot of article redirects left around that all need to start wearing {{Deletebecause}} as they're no longer needed... So taking as an assumption that you WERE snooping... about domai, do you think it would be WP:POINT if I cleaned it up and moved it to articlespace? Alexa rank has moved to 2400... —This unsigned comment was added by drunkLEGOfanatic (talk • contribs) .
- I wasn't aware of the technical issue, and thought that it was indeed an odd mistake for someone as experianced as yourself to make, sorry to cast aspersion! And a dedicated wikistalker like myself snoop through subpages? Never!
- Trying to fix it as we speak. What a messy job! ++Lar: t/c 02:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Herb Alpert edit
That album cover really makes your user page nifty, Herb has such a look on his face. But some may ask you to remove it as it's apparently fair use and Wikipedia policy on fair use is "only in articlespace", more or less... hope that helps. No reply necessary, but if you do, here is fine, I watch. ++Lar: t/c 05:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dang. Really? And Herb looks so sexy-but-he-don't-even-care. Sure there's not any loophole I could exploit here... say... linking to an outside image? Tijuana Brass 06:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- (I assume you moved here to talk here and are watching here) I am not a wikilawyer, just another editor. But I think you can link to anything. You just can't embed. all images that are visible in pages have to be hosted on WP or commons, that's the way the SW works here. (it's some sort of extension because on BrickWiki you can embed images. ++Lar: t/c 06:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's a configuration option IIRC. Probably sensible to have it turned off on a large site like Wikipedia; on a smaller wiki it's easier for the site owner to keep a track of these things. --kingboyk 08:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'll take it to the Help Desk. Thanks for the heads up. Tijuana Brass 07:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- The publicity still thing is a great idea, I'll check for one. And I'm just a talk page copier, so I tend to mirror my conversations when I'm not feeling too lazy... like with this one... Tijuana Brass 16:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- (I assume you moved here to talk here and are watching here) I am not a wikilawyer, just another editor. But I think you can link to anything. You just can't embed. all images that are visible in pages have to be hosted on WP or commons, that's the way the SW works here. (it's some sort of extension because on BrickWiki you can embed images. ++Lar: t/c 06:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: You da man... edit
Thanks. I'd been meaning to get to it for a while. The book I used has an incredible amount of data on all SP steam locomotives from inception through dieselization, and it's always the first reference I turn to for all SP steam questions. One project on my back burner is to distill the information in it to build a steam class overview page much like PRR locomotive classification (which would of course lead to individual articles on each SP locomotive class like Southern Pacific class AC-12). Slambo (Speak) 13:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
RfA thanks! edit
Hi Larry! Thank you for supporting my RfA. It passed at 105/1/0, putting me in WP:100 - I'm delighted and surprised! I'm always happy to help out, so if you need anything, please drop me a line. Cheers! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 20:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Lar, messaged Kingboyk about this user, no response as yet. I hit him with a test1 for adding Alex Reid ('til I clicked on) to The Beatles Can you deal please? Lion King 00:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, good job on the reversion in The Beatles. I looked at Alex Reid and reverted back to before he it it, I think your reversion only fixed part of it... I'm not an admin, so I can't block or protect. If he keeps vandalising there are noticeboards you can use to let people know about it. May need to read a bit about which is which, I forget, but you can get started figuring out which at WP:VIP and WP:ANI I think. From [10] you can see he hit 'N Sync too ++Lar: t/c 02:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Sanity check edit
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/911 In Plane Site I seem to be in the minority here. Could you look over this and tell me what my major malfunction is? brenneman{L} 03:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK but you may be barking up the wrong tree, I'm inclusionist rememeber? Smile. As to your major malfunction... good thing WP is not paper! However that will have to wait for another day. Giving it a boo as we speak. ++Lar: t/c 03:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- It is precisely your bizarre ideological bent that made me ask your opinion. This puts you with Tito in my "guys who'll probably disagree with me but will do so intelligently enough to make it worth my while" basket. For when I want to ackpay a ebateday I've got cronies. - brenneman{L} 06:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Bizarre ideological bent? Sputter. It is you and your Deletionist ScumTM cronies that have it all wrong way round. As if you could make a million articles appear by throwing well nigh everything you come across away! But that is a kefluffle for another day. Anyway I weighed in and ya, that DVD's not notable near as I could tell. I hope people get the walled garden reference. Now, yikes, it's almost 2 am and I should be for bed. ++Lar: t/c 06:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- It is precisely your bizarre ideological bent that made me ask your opinion. This puts you with Tito in my "guys who'll probably disagree with me but will do so intelligently enough to make it worth my while" basket. For when I want to ackpay a ebateday I've got cronies. - brenneman{L} 06:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks edit
Thanks for the support.. :) -- Natalya 04:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Off-wiki contact edit
Hi Lar. An email to your hotmail address bounced, "550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable". Could you check the address provided please? In the meantime I've added you to my Yahoo and MSN contact lists. --kingboyk 18:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Mail link works for me... were you using the "mail this user" to the left? Or the clickable mail link in the box on the right (both are the same or supposed to be). The other stuff in there is IM info, I never ever use hotmail for actual mail. ++Lar: t/c 19:05, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- No I emailed that Hotmail link on your user page. Methinks that account no longer works? Can you sign into Yahoo IM? I've got an auth request pending. --kingboyk 19:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- It works. I just never ever read it so may be it is full? I only use it as an IM identity... because I got MSN IM so far back in time that you had to get a hotmail account to use it... mail me on my (myuserid here)at miltontrainworks.com addy , or my firstname.lastname at gmail.com addy if you want... ++Lar: t/c 19:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Okie dokie. I'll forward the bounced email so you can check it out. Going to take a shower and pop out to the shop, had a bad day today which Wiki issues have only compounded sadly :( --kingboyk 19:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- It works. I just never ever read it so may be it is full? I only use it as an IM identity... because I got MSN IM so far back in time that you had to get a hotmail account to use it... mail me on my (myuserid here)at miltontrainworks.com addy , or my firstname.lastname at gmail.com addy if you want... ++Lar: t/c 19:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- No I emailed that Hotmail link on your user page. Methinks that account no longer works? Can you sign into Yahoo IM? I've got an auth request pending. --kingboyk 19:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Makemi RfA edit
Thank you for voting on my RfA. It passed with a consensus to promote of 45/7/1. To those of you concerned about the fact that I am a relative newcomer, I encourage you to poke me with a sharp stick if I make a mistake. Or better yet, let me know on my talk page, and I'll do my best to fix it. Makemi 04:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
goodarticle tag - a new proposal edit
hi, what do you think of my new proposal? i think it should satisfy everyone, assuming they dont have a secret agenda and have finished highschool. basically the template stays, but the tags on the main articlepages are all removed for now, pending the result of a *proper* discussion involving the wider wikipedia community. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Good_articles#The good article tag on main article space. Zzzzz 16:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Gibson split into two seperate divisions - Acoustic and Electric, that 1999 copyright might no longer apply. That site doesn't look like the Montana Div. site. Also , who would they be likely to contact first, my management or Wiki?. Cheers Lion King 01:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I am not a copyright lawyer. But copyrights don't just go away because of an asset sale or divestiture, someone ends up owning them, just like any other asset, tangible or intangible. So that copyright is still valid. They would go after Wikipedia first, which is why the policy is there... WP doesn't want to be sued successfully so needs to show good faith efforts to not keep text known to be in violation. I take it you are the source of this text? In general it's a bad practice to take text verbatim from other sites even if you think the copyright situation is OK. So I suspect it needs to go. Rewrite what it's trying to say in your own words if you can. ++Lar: t/c 01:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
I didn't copy anything "verbatim" from any site, I used information that came with my Gibson guitars. I have asked that the request to Gibson be withdrawn, and you have my personal permission to delete the whole article. Shall I do the honours, or will you?. Lion King 02:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- The article seems on a good topic, it would be a shame to delete it completely. We just have to fix the copyvio stuff. Did you type it all in by hand? Yikes! That's a lot of typing, I had just assumed you'd cut/paste it from the sources I found. Bad assumption, please accept my apologies....
- Rather than delete it outright, why don't you get rid of the clear copyvio sections (use the link I gave on the talk page) and leave the rest. Or if you can, write some of the stuff you would have to delete in your own words. Let's discuss further on the article talk page itself. ++Lar: t/c 02:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I asked that Gibson grant permission to use, so I think I should RV back to the version I found in case they see it yeah? Lion King 02:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't know. I think better to not have any copy vio text at all. The thing you want is permission, not a review of how it is now. Again, let's take this to the talk page of the article so others can participate. That's usually best. I'll refactor to there soon unless you object... ++Lar: t/c 03:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Answer edit
I have provided an answer to the additional question you added to my RFA. Moe ε 02:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1 edit
|
|
My RfA edit
|
My RfA | |
| Thank you for supporting/opposing/commenting on my request of adminship, sadly the result was 54/20/7 an thus only 73% support votes, resulting in that the nomination failed. As many of you commenting that I have to few main-space edits, I'll try to better my self on that part. If you have any ideas on what kind of articles I could edit, pleas send me a line. :) | →AzaToth
09:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC) | |
Tis done... It's quite a long list, but looks mostly sensible enough. Have "fun" :-) --kingboyk 12:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. Is this the definitive list for me to use in classification generation too? (it is useful in its own right in either case) ++Lar: t/c 13:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's it's primary purpose (the list actually excludes 2 categories right now, Apple Corps images and WikiProject The Beatles, which we don't need to classify.) Btw, the newsletter above is just the kind of thing I had in mind! :) --kingboyk 13:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
The Beatles The Beatles albums The Beatles bootlegs Apple Corps Apple Films Apple Records Apple Records albums Apple Records recording artists Apple Records singles The Beatles B-sides The Beatles' children The Beatles EPs The Beatles films George Harrison George Harrison albums George Harrison songs John Lennon John Lennon albums John Lennon singles John Lennon songs Paul McCartney Paul McCartney albums Paul McCartney classical albums Wings albums Paul McCartney songs The Beatles portal The Quarrymen The Beatles with Tony Sheridan The Beatles singles The Beatles songs Beatles song stubs Ringo Starr Ringo Starr albums Ringo Starr songs The Beatles' wives
60 second job with search/replace :) --kingboyk 16:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
Washington infobox edit
Can you respond at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Washington State Highways#Question for those who want milepost information? Thanks. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 04:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Rather basic Pearle question edit
I want to do some things that seem to align well with some of the read capability of Pearle (functionality to get just the wikitext that getPage() has) so I thought I'd start by taking a copy of the latest code, making just enough changes to let me run it (file paths etc) and to identity so no one got confused when I ran it, and carry out some calls to getPage(). But, and this is really basic! getPage has a check to see if the bot is logged on. What do I change to give it my credentials (If I start writing, I'll get a bot ID and apply for a bot flag... for now all I want to do is read something under program control and do some analysis)? I took a copy of the fake cookie file and see where to put the botID but not anywhere to put a password. All the pearle commands except STOP seem to actually want to write something important except the test() routine so I was trying to get that (it does a getPage() and then a postPage()) to work. I run from a DOS command line (this is on a wintel box, and I'm running ActiveState perl 5.8.7) and it reports that I'm not logged in. How do I set it up to be logged in as me? If this is not the right place, please let me know! ++Lar: t/c 00:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Followup, I did some more reading, more carefully, and found the setup instructions on User:Pearle/pearle-documentation.txt and carried those out to the best of my ability. Firefox uses a cookie file that is somewhat different format than LWP's but I copied the fields over for enwikitoken, enwikiuserid, and enwikiname from my cookie file in Firefox. I set the dates to the same times that firefox displays in the cookie viewer box. Unfortunately it is still reporting "Wiki server is not recognizing me (1)." on the " GET http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&action=edit"... thanks for any light you can shed... ++Lar: t/c 05:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not answering my questions is working out really well because I got the cookies set up right. As it turns out it was failing because I had changed what I was trying to match against, since I run monobook.js enhancements that change the name of the talk tab. Now it works, but in the next section after the login check, none of the regexs that return $text, $edittime, $starttime, $token, etc are matching anything. Regexs are not my strong point. Any suggestions as to how to debug that? (go up a level question: do you use test() yourself or is it obsolete and perhaps not expected to work quite right?) It gives lots of uninit var warnings but then posts empty text to the page, so the posting part is working. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 06:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- test() should work; it's provides as a convenient way to test getPage() and postPage(). It sounds like you have found the source of your problem. The only thing to do is to get a copy of the raw HTML you get back for the URL you are requesting, and fix the regexps so it will match exactly. There's not much special in the regexps in that function. Whatever is in the first () will be assigned to $1. \s means "any whitespace character", and + means "the previous character, one or more times". The perl regexp manpage is perlre, and documents the syntax pretty well. It's also on the web, for example http://www.hmug.org/man/1/perlre.php ... good luck! -- Beland 13:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- I am fine with talking on your page, it may benefit others, rather than here. But it looks like you refactored the thread here. Which is cool. Anyway, I think unless I messed up the regexes in getPage() that there is something wrong somewhere (mabye because I'm on wintel or a different perl than you?) The first regex to return $text (which is matching against the borders of the text entry box) is returning nothing, $1 is not getting set to anything, despite the fact that by eye anyway, it matches the html that is returned. Either I broke it somehow, or my page differs from the normal somehow (one thing I thought of was the size, I was running at different than 80x25 but changed back), or it's some environment difference. But I am pretty sure I never touched those regexes at all! the only thing I touched is the regex to recognise me instead of Pearle... I can post the code to look at if you want... thanks for your help. ++Lar: t/c 21:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorted. It turns out I DID have a bad regexp for getting $text, which maybe was from an older version of pearle.pl? It's working to append text now instead of replace: [11]... I am assuming that this regex is one that needs to be tinkered with, or at least checked, whenever any layout changes happen on the edit page? ++Lar: t/c 23:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- I am fine with talking on your page, it may benefit others, rather than here. But it looks like you refactored the thread here. Which is cool. Anyway, I think unless I messed up the regexes in getPage() that there is something wrong somewhere (mabye because I'm on wintel or a different perl than you?) The first regex to return $text (which is matching against the borders of the text entry box) is returning nothing, $1 is not getting set to anything, despite the fact that by eye anyway, it matches the html that is returned. Either I broke it somehow, or my page differs from the normal somehow (one thing I thought of was the size, I was running at different than 80x25 but changed back), or it's some environment difference. But I am pretty sure I never touched those regexes at all! the only thing I touched is the regex to recognise me instead of Pearle... I can post the code to look at if you want... thanks for your help. ++Lar: t/c 21:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
John A. Miller (coaster enterpreneur) edit
I need to write that article.
http://home.nyc.rr.com/johnmiller/
also need to do Flying Turns if it isn't there:
- http://www.knoebels.com/update.htm Knoebels is building one
- http://members.aol.com/coasting2/FlyingTurns.JPG
- http://coaster1robert.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/flyingturns.jpg
- http://home.nyc.rr.com/johnmiller/fturns.jpg
so there!
Userbox error edit
Greetings Lar
I've taken the liberty to remove the "crown.jpg" image from your "I trust Jimbo" userbox. Something very strange has happened to this image today, for an unknown reason, the crown has been mixed up with an image of two children. As a result, the thumbnail and the "real" image don't even show the same image. For the moment, it seems better to remove the faulty image from all templates - at least until we know what's going on. I hope you don't mind this edit. Best regards Valentinian (talk) 21:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Got nothing back from Gibson, nothing unusual there, they never make contact unless you want to buy a guitar or have a complaint! Just thought I'd let you know. Lion King 17:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- too bad but not too surprising. I bat about 10% success myself. Don't despair. My suggestion is instead to write what you want the article to say about the features and history in your own words and just cite that page as a source. ++Lar: t/c 17:46, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK Lar, had a bash at it, what do you think? Cheers, Lion King 18:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's definitely moving in the right direction, in my view. But see this diff [12] which is between when it had the mostly verbatim text and now. There's still a lot of lifted text. Now, I admit I am not perfect in this regard by any means. But I think the trick to rewriting in your own words is not to edit the text to make it different, but rather, and much harder, start with a clean sheet of paper and start writing what you want to say without looking at the original text much. That's a lot harder. THAT said doing that may not be worth the effort, I dunno. It's a call you'll have to make. There is still the chance that some other editor will see it and decide to revert it again as it stands but you've clearly made an effort which is something positive. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 18:47, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Understand what you mean, but I think there's nothing that Gibson would or could take issue with? Lion King 18:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Probably not. And I am no expert on policy but I get the sense that any copyvio is technically a problem. So then it becomes problematic from a policy perspective even if pragmatically it may never be an issue. So I dunno. ++Lar: t/c 19:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, but It's not like I'm saying that It's a heap of garbage, made of ply-wood an wot ever you do don't buy one, get a Martin instead! I see no reason why Gibson would take exception in any way, most of wots been written is common knowledge.Lion King 19:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nod. Absolutely! And what I'M saying is that reasonableness and the law hardly ever go together, and that Wikipedia tends to try to err on the side of conservativeness. I think it's OK to let it slide for now but just be aware some admin might decide something needs doing, and while you and I agree it's reasonable, no one is hurt, Gibson won't care, etc..., it's not policy. Does that make sense? I shan't belabour the point further. ++Lar: t/c 20:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- If an admin. takes issue then fair enough, I just play 'em! Cheers, Lion King 23:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)