User talk:Renamed user ixgysjijel/Archive 14

Fuzzy Wuzzy cont.

I honestly don't remember if I saw your work before doing mine or not, but I never claimed that the research was mine, because it was not. It was from the Kipling Society, which I link to from Wikisource. I loved their work but hated the design of the website and having to flip between windows to read the poem or check if there were notes on a particular line. (The frames weren't working right for me then, although they seem fine with my current set-up.) That was what drove me to take on the project at Wikisource. Considering my links match their info much more closely than yours (Pathan vs. 2nd Afghan War), I feel rather confident in my memory of being inspired from that website. But I never claim in the interview to have done anything special in tracking down what the references were about. I am happy to admit I got it pre-packaged. My main contribution is simply figuring out where Wikipedia had the info (i.e. 2nd Afgan War doesn't have it's own article) and making editorial decisions about what was too common knowledge or not covered well enough to link to.--BirgitteSB 05:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. In any case, it's a small matter compared to you getting the mop. Congratulations! - BanyanTree 06:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much!--BirgitteSB 06:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

BanyanTree at Wikimedia Commons

If you are one and the same as BanyanTree at Wikimedia Commons, then I think you will understand that a sock puppet of Grawp has been causing problems [1] over at Wikimedia Commons. Do you think the user account in question (Gavin.collins over at Wikimedia Commons) could be reassigned to me? --Gavin Collins (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I am indeed the same user. I have to admit that I am not nearly as familiar with Commons precedent and procedures as I should be. (My cleanup yesterday was the first time I'd used my Commons mop in three months or so.) I recommend repeating your question to Herbythyme, who is a pillar of the Commons community, is already familiar with the situation (having investigated several related sleeper accounts yesterday) and is so good-natured he makes me feel inadequate as an admin. Feel free to say that I recommend him to you. Also, it would be worth registering your name on at least the top 10 Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects (Wiktionary, Wikisource, etc) until single-user login becomes generally available. Good luck, BanyanTree 22:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

M4+2 engine

The reasons for deletion given by nominator no longer exist. At least 4 out of 5 references are valid sources according to WP:N, and after they were added there were no more votes. So I don't understand your ruling. I was sure the AfD procedure is not a majority vote, otherwise any attempt to improve the article during that would be just pure waste of time. Please reconsider relisting it one more time. greg park avenue (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, that was confusing. That may be the last time I use the provided delete link in an AFD header, as I couldn't tell that the page had been moved and couldn't figure out why the article still existed.

To your point, later AFD participants had a chance to evaluate the journal article, which appears to be the strongest support for notability, and still thought it merited deletion. I looked over the web-based articles and none appeared to have the weight of a journal article. (The cosmetic changes obviously don't establish notability, neither does the patent link as nobody is disputing that it exists.) I am satisfied that this is an accurate reading of the consensus, though would understand if you want to take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thanks, BanyanTree 20:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for understanding and for kindly supplying the advise. You sound as an expert in this particular field, so I gather I might just follow it. greg park avenue (talk) 21:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for M4+2 engine

An editor has asked for a deletion review of M4+2 engine. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. greg park avenue (talk) 21:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I have added my reasoning above. Thanks, BanyanTree 22:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

At the suggestion of lifebaka, I have userfied the article's content and history to User:Greg park avenue/M4+2 engine, so that Greg park avenue can have a few weeks/months to try to improve it. I thought I ought to let you know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 02:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the note. - BanyanTree 02:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sinebot stuff

Yep. The API can pop out a user's 'x' amount of contribs, including on a given page (e.g., SineBot's last 5 on the Rosa Parks talk page). You just have to prettyify the output so that it displays at the top of your watchlist. I bet there's something hiding on the toolserver for at least prettyifying the api result, but I'm not sure if there's a user-friendly drop in for the watchlist, possibly due to the added ease with which one would be able to wikistalk non-bots. :P --slakr^\ talk / 07:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, but this seems a little beyond my non-techie skills. I was hoping that there was a Monobook script that someone with a similar issue had come up with. The simplest course appears to continue looking for the "reverted to Sinebot" messages when patrolling my watchlist. Cheers, BanyanTree 08:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Edits on "History of Darfur Page"

I'm not sure who edited the history of Darfur page; however, I know the rules of Wikipedia and have no reason to insert random letters into an article. 74.161.9.175 17:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

In order to avoid getting messages that don't apply to you, I recommend creating an account. Thanks, BanyanTree 21:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Aboke Girls De Temmerman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aboke Girls De Temmerman.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Alice Auma Lakwena Behrend.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, you lovely little bot. - BanyanTree 05:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

MalePenis picture

Hi, thanks for approving the picture so it can be posted in the article. However a user removed it for being "unencyclopedic". Is can you confirm that the image is encyclopedic? Thanks again. 69.29.254.57 (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, As an administrator on the bad image list, I evaluate requests purely on if they are intended to cause vandalism/disruption. A picture of penis on the penis page is not vandalism obviously, but the question of which image best helps illustrates the article is a content dispute that is beyond my activities on the bad image list. You will have to discuss the matter with editors at Talk:Penis, as with any other content dispute. Thanks, BanyanTree 23:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

ITN candidate page mockup

Thanks for getting started on this, and setting up the timer. After much trial and error, I think I've managed a method to transclude everything automatically, using a fancy template and the talk pages of the current events pages.--Pharos (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, that's clever. I wouldn't have thought of using the current events' talk pages. I'll drop a note into the ITN reform discussion so people can check it out. Thanks, BanyanTree 00:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Have I been too WP:BOLD? Maybe, but I'm hopeful.--Pharos (talk) 09:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, someone was either going to make a move or nothing was going to happen. There are far too many people who think that the template stagnation is a result of uninterested admins or lack of will, rather than a structural problem.

I don't quite understand Random89's objection. The proposal page to reform ITN is clearly the appropriate forum, and the discussion was well advertised. He can make a case that there is never going to be a clear consensus and therefore nothing should be done, but to state that consensus must be reached in two separate forums is not supported by any precedent I can think of. - BanyanTree 10:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, it would be great if you could back me up at Template talk:In the news.--Pharos (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Trial run on ITN reform proposal

I have now proposed a one-week trial run for the ITN reform proposal at Template talk:In the news#Change in ITN/c format. Please comment there. Also, I'm going to be away from the computer for the next few days, and will not return till the time the trial run starts (and it's possible I might be a couple of hours late); it would be great if you could keep an eye on things. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Trial period has started. I hope you can help[ me in administering it. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 00:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I'd like to change [[Template:ITN-Update]] to update every 24 hours, not 12. This would be more conservative, and is the way most people (mis)interpreted it anyway. Actually, my idea was originally that we would have two items added at a time every 24 hours or so, not updates every 12 hours. It would be good if you could help me fix the template, which I can't get to work with 24 hours. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 17:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops. I made a quick adjustment for 24 hours. The intermediate color will eventually have to be chosen separately, as right now it goes straight from beige to red. - BanyanTree 23:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Fictional character

What specific part of that page have I violated? It should be obvious from context that the characters are fictional. An encyclopedia would never refer to a real person as a character.

When I see that so and so is a "fictional character in so and so series", I assume that he/she is a fictional character within the universe of that show, a la Itchy and Scratchy in The Simpsons. The phrase only properly applies to a handful of articles. Awbizkomeydownstar (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

(ec) I'm not defending the MOS. I'm informing you of it. Check out the articles linked from Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)#List of exemplary articles. - BanyanTree 07:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'll take my argument there. Thanks. Awbizkomeydownstar (talk) 07:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Good work on the CCM article, by the way. A definite candidate for Did you know. Polemarchus (talk) 01:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it would be except that new articles that are put into ITN are disqualified from DYK for being attention hogs. :( Cheers, BanyanTree 02:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I guess ITN's even better :-) Polemarchus (talk) 03:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The current Revolution at ITN

Moved barnstar to User:BanyanTree. 02:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm glad someone likes it. We'll see what manages to stick around once the trial ends. - BanyanTree 22:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Given that I don't think this has a particularly good result, I wish to decline the barnstar. Thank you very much for the thought though. - BanyanTree 23:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

User page comment issue...

Huh?

I use Firefox 2 and WP:TWINKLE, so would reasonably have expected it to save longs pages. I hope the 'loss' of comments, was reverted quickly, if not that page needs an inteligent rollback ASAP.

Would also be appreciated if someone raised the issue with TWINKLE developers.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Like, I said, I don't know if that the cause, but it certainly looks like something I've seen before. It has nothing to do with TWINKLE, as it's purely an issue with the browser of the user. If it's not that, I have no idea. In any case, I reverted the mass blanking. - BanyanTree 11:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Autoblocks

Hi. Just thought I'd leave a quick note about this. In cases where it appears that a user has been unblocked, but they still cannot edit, it is likely an autoblock on the account. To unblock these, we need more information, which can be asked for by using {{autoblock}}. Re-blocking and unblocking won't do anything. Anyhow, I've taken care of this one. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I don't know how it's possible to be an admin for several years without knowing that, but that really was the first time I've ever seen that. Cheers, BanyanTree 21:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

ITN trial

I am really upset about how this ITN trial has been rammed through the system by people who don't actually participate in ITN or ITN/C regularly. I am also disappointed in Pharos's attitude towards people who are trying to point out the shortcomings of the trial process, which is much more dismissive than would serve all of our purposes. I think I've noted all of that on the template talk page, but I appreciate you making me aware of the rules and trying to unblock me before. -- Grant.Alpaugh 21:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

ITN Zimbabwe

Is that really a big enough story to post, seems rather trivial in the day to day dealings of that part of the world? --Stephen 02:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It was on the front page of BBC News and The Washington Post when I posted it to ITN. Zimbabwe is currently one of the big kerfuffles, even in that part of the world, with African Union members beginning to finally question things and South Africa's Mbeki coming under some major flack for his wait and see policy. This also links into the recent South Africa anti-immigrant riots, as many of the migrants are Zimbabweans fleeing the country. Given that Tsvangirai may have actually won the first round outright, this is generally considered another marker pointing to a total bloodbath in the near future. Also I don't do relative regional comparisons - to do so would lead to morally abhorrent practices like figuring out what fraction of a 'real person' an African is worth. - BanyanTree 05:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Moved to User:BanyanTree. BanyanTree 22:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ha! Not at all. I've done that myself and sat around wondering, "Where did half of my article go to?" Cheers, BanyanTree 06:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

changin referenced text

Thanks for the tip. I can assure you it is not my intention to alter the information under reference in any way that might be seen to mislead anyone. I try to improve syntax and phraseology, as well as elaborate, and equivocate, the article as far as may be appropriate. If this turns out not to be appropriate, I will not argue. Both elaboration and equivocation are potentially controversial, I admit. I say again though, my only intention is to improve any article's readability by the balance and harmoniseation of the arguments within. If you ask me this improves the encyplopedicness of a text. I ultimately do not alter tha facts. I am also - as far as the Rwandan Genocide is of concern, entirely objective; being from the U.K, with a critical, rather than cynical attitude.

WikieWikieWikie (talk) 11:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I haven't actually identified an actual problem from my brief scan of your edits. I felt there was a potential concern there, especially given how contentious the topic can be. Cheers, BanyanTree 13:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi, (asking you as it seems you are the main editor)

Why do we not have two different articles on the LRA ind LRA insurgency, like all other conflicts?

Cheers, --TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Y'know, I came across a stub for Second Ugandan Civil War once that seemed to be an attempt to break out the conflict and recommended a merge it into the LRA article. (That seems to be a term used entirely by some activists.) I suppose that it's largely a function that the conflict is peculiarly configured by the idiosyncrasies of the LRA and I can't think of the conflict without thinking of the LRA, in particularly Kony. It seems to me that a conflict article would seem nonsensical without a thorough understanding of the wackiness of the LRA, so it makes sense that they are one article. I'm not against separate articles, but I'm not sure what the value added is to taking that step. What do you think? - BanyanTree 01:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I've heard that Uganda, Congo and S.Sudan are preparing an offensive against the LRA. Since I'm going probably to work on it I will be against naming it Lord's Resistance Army (2008-present) --TheFEARgod (Ч) 08:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

That's understandable. Do you just want to add to the Lord's Resistance Army#Developments since 2005 section or do you want a separate article to play with? If you want, I could move Lord's Resistance Army (2002-2005) to Lord's Resistance Army (2002-2007) and merge the info from Developments since 2005 in, leaving you the LRA article to yourself for the most recent events. I've gotten worn down by the slow motion edit warring over if the LRA is "Christian" or not, which is apparently the only thing most editors find interesting, so don't give that article nearly the attention I should, and would be OK with any solution you feel warranted. Thanks, BanyanTree 09:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Copied to Talk:Lord's Resistance Army for continued conversation. - BanyanTree 06:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

2006–2008 Juba talks

Should the intro be updated before we put this up? Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 23:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for reminding me. Give me a moment. - BanyanTree 23:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, that should do it. - BanyanTree 23:40, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Found poetry

I'm recruiting a bunch of people to edit or watchlist found poetry...so, uhm, yeah, I'm recruiting you. --Justpassin (talk) 01:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'm happy to watchlist. - BanyanTree 01:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, help me please

I humbly beg your indulgence to share your thoughts in our User:Diligent Terrier/Florentino floro and Maxschmelling before conclusion, considering that your page stated that: "I have administrator privileges both here on English Wikipedia and at Commons. Feel free to bring any needed moppage to my attention." With all due respect and regards. I respectfully submitted your message to me as evidence ITN[2] in our User:Diligent Terrier/Florentino floro and Maxschmelling. Thanks.--Florentino floro (talk) 09:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Responded there. - BanyanTree 23:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Picture question

Some days ago, you helped answer my question at WP:VP/A about cropping a picture and uploading it to Commons. I've uploaded the picture (Image:RPTS Class of 1887.jpg); would you be willing/able to crop it properly to focus on H. W. Temple? I don't have any editing software except for Microsoft Paint: it's good for drawing nice straight lines, but anything else it really can't do. Nyttend (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just have the basic photo editing software that came with my computer, but I gave it a shot at Image:H.W. Temple -RPTS Class of 1887.jpg. Let me know if you want a redo; I had to make it slightly askew because of the other fellow's elbow. - BanyanTree 23:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; it's not the best, but I don't think it could be done better with such a photo, as long as we don't have Mr Patton in the picture at all. Do you think I should post somewhere, asking help from someone with more impressive photo editing software, so it could (perhaps) like make it nice and circular or ovaloid, and fading out on the edges (if you know what I mean)? Nyttend (talk) 02:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I am easily satisfied with images, but you can certainly ask at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve, where all manner of editors with fancy imaging toys hang out. - BanyanTree 03:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if that came out wrongly; are you okay with my asking? Nyttend backup (talk) 04:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course. Users should take their editing as far as they feel is necessary to build the encylopedia. - BanyanTree 11:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, just wanted to made sure that I'd not offended at all :-) Nyttend (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:User CB

Hi, can you please change the border color of the userbox Template:User CB from white to black? I cannot understand how to do it. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The template was in an older format and needed to be entirely switched to the new version. I have added a black line. Please see Template:Userbox for how to make other modifications. - BanyanTree 07:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Global deleted image review

I am afraid your link lead to an empty page, where is this page? I would be happy to comment. Secondly, I responded at Template_talk:Watchlist-notice#global_sysops_message. Prodego ^talk 02:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied there. - BanyanTree 02:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I replied over at meta:Talk:Global_deleted_image_review#View_image_history_only Prodego ^talk 02:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I just read it. Thanks for your thoughts. - BanyanTree 02:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

http://www.WHTour.org/4 WHTour.org at L'Anse aux Meadows— World Heritage sites in panographies - 360 degree imaging

I looked at this to see if it seemed ok, and I thought it was legit -- did you read their introduction? [3]. I'm usually pretty ruthless with external links, what don't you like about this one?--Doug Weller (talk) 12:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't even get as far as looking at the site. I saw "tour" in the domain name, checked the contribs to see mass placement of external links to the same site, and immediately went to rollback, based entirely on the 'remove spam as a rule'-rule. If you feel that this merits an exception, I'm happy to concede. I've rolled my rollbacks back. - BanyanTree 13:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That was my initial reaction also. But yesterday I wasted quite a bit of time on Middle Ages trying to clean out some perceived copyvio only to find out that the book I thought it was copied from was by a publisher who publishes Wikipedia articles as books -- $9.99 gets you a copy of an old Wikipedia article! So, having made that big mistake, this time I checked the url to see what it was. Doug Weller (talk) 13:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am the author of WHTour.org, a non-profit organization documenting the WH in 360. What can I do to avoid the "tour" misunderstanding when creating external links in Wiki ? Thank you for advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.55.75.176 (talk) 13:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. You currently write "WHTour.org in Damascus — World Heritage sites in panographies - 360 degree imaging". The frontloading of the domain name in the linked text and odd syntax is very spam-my, and will raise the hackles of many editors who try to maintain articles. I would recommend something along the lines of "Panographies of World Heritage sites in Damascus by world-heritage-tour.org", so information about what is found at the end of the link comes first. it appears that WHTour.org redirects to world-heritage-tour.org, which is less ambiguous and thus more reassuring to editors reviewing your contributions. - BanyanTree 13:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Copy and paste move

Hi BT,

Hope you are well. I've just noticed during the course of traversing around WP that the article New Hall, Cambridge was moved to Murray Edwards College, Cambridge by copy and paste on the 18th June. I initially thought of undoing it, but probably there's an easier way, such as merging the histories, which you may be able to do?

Cheers — SteveRwanda (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, merging the histories isn't easier, since it requires a bunch of button clicking and text merging, but it does preserve the attribution and thus the GFDL-compliance. That should do it. - BanyanTree 22:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. SteveRwanda (talk) 09:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Improvements needed to keep Rosa Parks as a Featured Article

As with most articles promoted so long ago, this article does not currently meet the Featured article criteria. Since you have been a major contributor to the article, I would appreciate your help to bring this article up to the current standards. Please don't take this as an insult to the article, as it is well-written and there shouldn't be a lot of work necessary.

I have listed my concerns on the article's talk page. I would like to get this up to the current standards without going through a Featured Article review, so any help would be appreciated. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 20:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

2008 Jerusalem bulldozer attack images

2008 Jerusalem bulldozer attack

http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/c.hsJPK0PIJpH/b.3890633/

ir clearly states regarding the images and multimedia on their site: "Please use these freely, and if possible indicate to us whenever you use any of these materials by contacting one of the following persons" elio@theisraelproject.org

LsdjfhkjsbLsdjfhkjsb 05:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. That is not CC-BY 3.0, as they make no mention of Creative Commons. That seems to be Template:Copyrighted free use provided that, with their optional specifications, or possibly Template:Attribution, if one is being generous. In any case, I'm convinced that the licensing problems are not such that they require immediate deletion. Thanks, BanyanTree 04:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Sonuk Mikko

When I create his page I am going to refer to him as Billy Bowlegs IV. Because something that you said. You asked who Billy Bowlegs II was? Well the person we were actually discussing (Holato Mikko) is Billy Bowlegs II his father was the original Billy Bowlegs. I personally think once Billy Bowlegs IV is created that the title of III and IV should be switched. But that is something for another day.Swampfire (talk) 03:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a citation for that? You can't move Billy Bowlegs III because that is his name, according to Google, regardless of if he's actually the fourth Billy Bowlegs. Why not just create the article at Sonuk Mikko and avoid worrying about the name? - BanyanTree 03:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I wasnt going to create it as Billy Bowlegs IV, I was going to create it as Sonuk Mikko and mention him as Billy Bowlegs IV, but I guess the IV can be left off and just talk about how he took over the name. The thing is Billy Bowlegs III wasn't refered to as Billy Bowlegs III when he was alive. He was just refered to as Billy Bowlegs because he took the name as well. Heck he wasn't even the third But I'm guessing media of the time dubbed the I, II, III as to when they became notable. But that is just a guess.Swampfire (talk) 03:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

opinion

Do you think you could possibly check out this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Notable Native Americans of the United States and possibly and give you opinon, or close the discussion. There are 9 people that say keep, one that asks the question of merge, because he didn't understand the difference between native americans and native americans of the united states. And only one delete and the discussion hasn't really been that active for a few days. The page List of Notable Native Americans of the United States is undergoing constant improvements. I work on it everyday.Swampfire (talk) 15:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I hope that justice would be served in the genocide case.--Florentino floro (talk) 10:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

A bit belated I know, but thanks for this. Also a bigger thanks for the reforms on ITN. I think the inclusionist attitude has helped make the template a lot more interesting, and ITN/C has been, in my opinion, a lot more harmonious of late. So well done. Hammer Raccoon (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. That's pretty much what I hoped would happen by backing Pharos' idea and it's nice to hear that at least one person thinks it's going alright. Cheers, BanyanTree 00:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Add me in. ITN has been going along a lot faster, though we can't be too inclusionist if articles are not/insufficiently updated. Great job, btw. Cheers, Spencer^T♦C 01:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey thanks! - BanyanTree 08:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN

Can you remove the item about the Belgium government...the article needs more updates, and the item itself could use more wording anyway. Spencer^T♦C 01:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

You could also possibly add the Battle of Wanat item. Spencer^T♦C 01:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. - BanyanTree 02:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

generic header title

Post moved from top. - BanyanTree 08:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, can you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_breese and put in your vote to keep or delete, I am rather outnumbered by some non-spiritual bullies, could use someone who has a co-operative energy to look into the matter on a spiritual teacher article. Also please look into another article that was deleted that has been there for years at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_metaphysical_sciences but was deleted by a user as soon as I linked to it. Thanx (SpiritBeing (talk) 08:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)SpiritBeing)

Please do not canvass for votes by spamming user talk pages. See Wikipedia:Canvassing. Thanks, BanyanTree 08:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

French

I replied at Wikipedia talk:FAQ/Main Page#French Wikipedia image alignment. Thanks - Tempshill (talk) 15:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN talk

What the hell? Why are you assuming the worst? I've been around long enough not to let bitey remarks get to me, but what the hell? Did I piss you off at some point? --Elliskev 01:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't stand users who skulk around the edges of a point. "Seems to go against the spirit of WP:BLP, in my opinion" is so weak that it's not even worth stating. After I pointed you to the relevant board, which may have some BLP fanatics who may be willing to rally to ambiguity, you stated you weren't actually in an argument but were looking for an answer. You have since stated that you are "simply asking a question, stating my opinion, and waiting to see if there were other opinions", which you apparently think is somehow not an argument. This is a display of such offensively weak reasoning that I wonder why you're even bothering to post. If you have an argument, lay out your points and supporting evidence. Don't pretend you're not making an point with an (at least tentative) preferred outcome in mind, and then get offended when the response isn't as limp-wristed as you would prefer. You may even have gotten my support if you could explain the foundations of your argument. - BanyanTree 01:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe you're an admin. --Elliskev 12:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little amazed myself. - BanyanTree 22:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. I was out-of-line with that. I'm just frustrated that my comment/question/motive was immediately called out as something other than it was meant to be. I'm also frustrated with the tone of the calling-out. I've made some stupid heat-of-the-moment mistakes, but I try pretty damn hard to understand other editors points of view. I try pretty damn hard to temper my comments when I think another editor is being stupid as hell. I usually do a pretty good job. I'll admit that I have called another editor a stupid-ass or something along those lines. But, I try to do better. When I am, for all intents and purposes, called a stupid-ass it frustrates me. --Elliskev 00:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I really don't see a point in continuing this discussion, but I don't think you were out of line at all. - BanyanTree 05:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

S O S! Invitation

Hi! maxsch created an RFC for myself User:Florentino floro - Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro[4] I would appreciate it if you would take a look. Max created this upon message to my adopting parent User:Diligent Terrier here[5] vis-a-vis the pending User:Diligent Terrier/Florentino floro and Maxschmelling (created on 18:38, 18 May 2008 by Diligent Terrier) Thanks.--Florentino floro (talk) 05:35, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN

Don't worry, you are being watched ;) But you're doing such a great job! --Stephen 23:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank goodness! Now I can take that week-long break to actually write articles and decompress, now that I know that someone will handle it. (Only half-joking.) Heh. - BanyanTree 23:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Current ITN picture

I'm not quite sure that its use is quite correct in this situation. For example, say the Republican Party was the subject and bolded headline in ITN, I don't think a picture of Mike Duncan, the current chairman, would be correct. Spencer^T♦C 00:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Gandhi is the first person pictured in the bold-linked United Progressive Alliance, which was enough for me. I had considered putting Manmohan Singh up, but it all appears to be a bit of wash in terms of relevance - and it's been forever since we had a woman who was not a tennis player pictured on ITN so I figured would go with Gandhi. The parliamentary system has always been a bit of mystery to me, with the off-chance that people might want to dissolve the government on any given day, so it's quite possible I'm completely wrong on this - in which case I would suggest getting the attention of someone who understands parliaments better than I. - BanyanTree 01:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think I see where you're coming from. Spencer^T♦C 01:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL. Sometimes gratification is nearly immediate. - BanyanTree 05:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

:( and sometimes crushing despair follows on its heels. <sigh> Looks like you were right the first time. - BanyanTree 06:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear, Manmohan Singh is the head of the Indian government and any vote of confidence/no confidence is a vote of confidence/no confidence in his government by MPs. Sonia Gandhi doesn't come into it at all, chairperson of UPA or not... Nil Einne (talk) 13:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

So if a coalition government is challenged, it has nothing to do with the coalition? I think we can all agree that them thar for'ners are strange. Government systems where heads of state with near single digit approval ratings can continue swanning along until scheduled elections are clearly more civilized. - BanyanTree 13:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN correction

Please note that a vote of confidence motion was moved by the Government of India not vote of no-confidence by the Opposition as the current blurb suggests. Please make a correction ASAP. --Emperor Genius (talk) 03:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I changed it to the wording used in the article. Thanks, BanyanTree 04:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but you also need to change the inter-link to Motion of Confidence from Motion of no confidence --Emperor Genius (talk) 04:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Grrrr, I say. Done. - BanyanTree 04:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the notice but I check ITN pages pretty often so I am up to date already ;-) Cheers. --Tone 22:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:No-confindence vote in ITN

Sure, if we get the new article created as suggested by Soman then I will let know on ITN/C page. BTW, keep up the good work of ITN updates. You are doing a tremendous job to update the section everyday. --gppande «talk» 07:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Your "epic"

May I suggest you, instead of quoting the whole thing, link to most of it, so that your statement looks a little bit neater (and shorter!)? - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 10:51, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

On the subject of that, it's really only a minor, minor thing, but where you say "Simultaneously, Bedford was posting to his own talk page" (e.t.c.), the word "posting" actually links to Seraphim Whipp's response to Bedford, rather than Bedford's post itself. The link you intended to use was this one, I think. Like I say, it's only a minor thing, as the text in question still appears on the page. It's just minor things like this sometimes trouble me. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 11:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure enough. I remembered about halfway through writing it why I hate spending time in the project space so much. - BanyanTree 11:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the careful account of that incident. I noticed you took the majority of it off the the RfArb page per request. I would suggest restoring the last paragraph to the main page as I thought that was a very important point. But anyways thank for taking the time to explain what happened. I personally hadn't understood the nuts and bolts of DYK hooks before reading it.--BirgitteSB 12:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm with Birgitte. If it makes you feel any better for the amount of time you put into it, I can't really imagine a better, more complete summary of the whole thing. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 12:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Great work on your epic comment there. I added it to my comment in the hope they won't waste the time on this case (unless, of course, I'm missing something, which happens often). Shrug. —Giggy 13:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Oooh, linking to the revision is smart. - BanyanTree 13:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

My contribution to the free knowledge movement. —Giggy 14:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, very comprehensive summation. Seraphim♥Whipp 13:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks all. I actually thought I was doing something wrong because everyone else had such short statements. (I've made precisely two comments on ArbCom talk pages before this, in the firm belief that the only thing worse than being named in an arbitration case is being selected to be an arbitrator, and hanging around those pages seems to increase one's chances of both.) - BanyanTree 13:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN nom

Heh, :D. By the way, can you put up the George Tupou V item? I did the wording for it, and it's ready. It's amazing how much small islands bias there is in ITN/C. ;D.

Anyway, the break starts in 2 days. Do you know where the vacation break template is, the one you can put on your userpage? I would like put one up for then. Cheers, Spencer^T♦C 01:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The template is {{Vacation}}, which has various parameters.

I'm trying to gird my loins to put a third item on small island chains on ITN, as I'm honestly surprised that there hasn't been a cohesive opposition form thus far. I feel like I'm part of a social experiment to see how much information on small islands editors will take before cracking. I've been hoping that we'll get enough candidates to push at least one off, which we just might have right now with your item and the Doha Round, though I would like to give the Doha Round item a bit more time for comments as the timer isn't screaming at us. I think there's a nefarious plot by the AFD folk to keep vetoing our candidates!  ;) It'll get up. Just give it some time, if another admin doesn't beat me to it. - BanyanTree 01:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Oh, and by the way, check out the message below...I thought up the idea while trying to fall asleep. Spencer^T♦C 01:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN Administrator category

I created the category Category:Wikipedia in the news frequent administrators. As you have experience in ITN and ITN-related matters, I invite you to add your name there. The purpose is so if a non-admin (such as myself) needs an administrator to add, modify, or remove an item, you have experience in this area. Thanks, Spencer^T♦C 01:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me think this over. I have a personal rule against volunteering for anything that might require me to work more than the absolute minimum, and I've been using the timer on my userpage as a flag for when I may be needed. - BanyanTree 01:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, keep in mind that you have the third highest number of edits to the template. Anyway, the choice is yours. Spencer^T♦C 01:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

What a disturbing statistic. - BanyanTree 05:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Solar eclipse of August 1, 2008 ITN

On 1 August, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item involving the article(s) Solar eclipse of August 1, 2008, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently updated or created article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--PeterSymonds (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Ha, that's awesome! - BanyanTree 21:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

ITN

Hello. The news report that you added about US officials concluding the bombing is not true. Misleading because the NY times is the ones that made the allegations about unnamed US officials. No US officials have supported it. It's an allegation by the NY Times only. Please change/remove from ITN. Thanks! --Dfgxx (talk) 05:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. I was away from the computer. You can normally get a response from an admin through WP:ITN/C. In any case, I have responded on that page. Thanks, BanyanTree 06:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Share Taxi Neologism? Old Jitney Article?

I got to Share Taxi as a redirect from Jitney. That was the first time I had heard the term and didn't see it used much outside India in a cursory search, so I'm wondering if it is technically a neologism. I really don't know what is the most used phrase among transport professionals worldwide and will try to do some research but whatever it is - including if it is share taxi - that's what we should use for a general article. Meanwhile I can see Jitney is ethno-centric, but I think it still deserves its own page since it is widely used among some transport alternative people in the US/Britain and is an alternative they need to know more details about. Do you know if there was a big page on jitney that got merged? If so, how can I get my hands on it? Thanks. Carol Moore 14:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

Goodness, how did you track me down? It's been forever since I've looked at that article.

It's not a neologism. "Share taxi" is widely used in parts of East Africa, and it has the benefit of having a meaning that is guess-able from its name. (If you don't know what a jitney, matatu or concho is off the top of your head, it's unlikely that you'll be able to guess.) As I recall, there were a bunch of stubs on articles that didn't get much past the basic concept so all got merged. Here's the diff for jitney. As you can see, there wasn't much there. Taking a look at share taxi now it appears that a number of articles, such as Dollar van, have since been started by users rebelling against the centralization. But the main result seems to be a confusing structure. Sorry I can't be of more help. - BanyanTree 15:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

First, remember one can go to earliest history of article and see who was most involved. Otherwise, i'll have to do some research and see if something more universally used by those interested in the topic comes up. And jitney can always be re-created as new article. Though towards end of my To do list ;-( Thanks. Carol Moore 16:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

Concerning Civil War

Thanks for your revert to the article above; I had to log off after protecting it. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. Thanks for the protection. It has been annoying me for days. - BanyanTree 22:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: thanks

No thanks needed (but still appreciated). I spoke my mind and stand by what I said, even if I admit it may have just stirred the pot with no real gain. I realized after that it wasn't you who posted it, but decided that reviving a dying discussion wasn't worth it to make that point. Random89 06:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Rwandan Genocide people

Category:Rwandan Genocide people, which you created, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 12:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

ITN order

Oh I see, thanks for the information. I read through those and related pages a while back, when I first edited the template, but I must have misunderstood the procedure; apologies. Thanks for the correction. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 02:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Running Man Barnstar

		The Running Man Barnstar
		I hereby award this Running Man Barnstar to BanyanTree for helping to keep 2008 Summer Olympics highlights current and detailed. preschooler@heart 07:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 10 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Confraternities in Nigeria, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 12:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments

I cut your comments from here and pasted them here, along with my answer (I apologize in advance for its length). Thank you. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 13:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Rfc and query

Hi, may I respectfully ask you some time to share your view on this[6]. Essentially, I asked the WP:ANI on the validity of User:Cma vis-a-vis User:Flaminsky, - re Vandalism.

And if you have more time, please share more thoughts on the Rfc Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro. Thanks.-

--Florentino floro (talk) 10:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Move Room (architecture) to Room

Hi. On 10 Jun 2007 you moved Room (architecture) to Room, a sensible move IMHO. Please correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but should you also correct all the links that point to Room (architecture) as a part of this move? --Jrsnbarn (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Not generally. See WP:R2D. If the users are still getting to the page that they intend to get to, without going through a dab page or having to deal with a misleading article title or link name, then there generally isn't considered to be a problem. While I'm obsessive-compulsive about many things on Wikipedia, fine-tuning of redirects has never been one of them. Admittedly some people can't see a situation like that without an nagging urge to "fix" it, in which case they might get one of the nice folks over at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks to handle this. Cheers, BanyanTree 22:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Your friend Eddy of the wiki^{[citation needed]} 03:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Ne request

Hi BanyanTree. I added a new request here. -- Suntag ☼ 14:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Curious, I thought the page was move protected.

I thought that the expiration of move=sysop was not set to expire for days on Proposed bailout of United States financial system.
Had the move protection expired?
cheers, Yellowdesk (talk) 03:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Never mind, I read the logs for the article. I see that move protection expired, but not edit semi protection. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 03:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Creampie

Funnily enough, I actually added that image in question to the article a couple of days ago; however after reading Talk:Creampie (sexual act)#Creampiesex.jpg missing? and seeing the deleted image myself, I reverted immediately with a bit of embarassment. Interesting though, considering we have WP:NOTCENSORED. I'd never heard of 2257 before, and was wondering whether the one you mentioned, and the one in use on the article needed deleting also, although I'm fairly confident that neither are of minors. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

PS, I hope that wasn't the vandalism you referred to - it was just plain stupidity due to not thinking. :/ Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

To prevent anyone going back in the history, seeing the pic and thinking it a good idea to add it back in, I'm about to delete that edit. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, User:Alison mentions that your image was used for vandalism in her edit summary to MediaWiki:Bad image list and I take her on her word. You would have to ask her for details.

I have deleted the images that were used on the article and left a note on the talk page. There's obviously a bit of ambiguity here if you just look at the wording of the law, penetration clearly triggers it, while posing nude holding a dildo apparently does not. Jimbo, who does have the benefit of legal counsel, states that creampies, which obviously cannot occur without penetration, trigger 2257. IANAL and assume he knows what he's talking about. There should probably be a policy formulated for WP:CSD, but I'm way to lazy to draft it.

On a more general note, while Wikipedia is not censored, it is also not a free for all and is governed by external law and the community sense of encyclopedic-ness, as well as by Jimbo setting precedent by fiat, which he seems to do less and less. See Wikipedia:Pornography for a sense of where the outer bounds are. - BanyanTree 23:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Just want to say that that image was not mine, I just added it and quickly thought better of myself and removed it. I agree with what you said on the talk page, re Jimbo's stance, and I'm sure there must be plenty of other articles with similarly ambiguous pictures that would strike a 2257. I'll look for some, but I'm not a Commons admin so will have to tag as CSD. What would be the Commons template best suited for that? Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

BanyanTree, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer^T♦C 02:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Axum

Hello, Renamed user ixgysjijel. You have new messages at Starstriker7's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Adoption

Thank you for those words. I think that would work out perfectly for me. I will not be very active for a while anyway, because I am an overworked student (yes, such a thing does exist!). If you wouldn't mind when I ask you questions and submit my first major edits to you, before I put them up, then I would be very very pleased to be an adoptee. Thank you again. --Juliet (talk) 00:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. As my first piece of advice, I should note that new sections always go at the very bottom of discussion pages (like this one), which can be done easily by clicking the "new section" or "+" tab at the top of the page. I look forward to hearing from you. Cheers, BanyanTree 01:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I plan first to enlarge the introduction 'Uganda' section, paraphrasing the entire article, as the 'too short' tag seems to need, and adding history on how the nation came to be. Is it a good idea? Is someone else doing it already? It will take me time because I am very busy for weeks, but we get mid semester break, and will do it then. Oh by the way, please delete all our old communication, if you wish, or give me another way to contact you, or your talk page will grow a lot ! Best Wishes --Juliet (talk) 23:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Juliet, That all sounds good. I see that you've asked about your edit at the WikiProject. You'll soon notice that there are very few regular editors of Ugandan topics, so it's very unlikely that your plans will conflict with anyone else's or even that anyone will feel the need to respond. So be bold!

Substantively, I recommend you look at History of Uganda to see if the content you wanted to add is already there. If so, you can summarize it at the history section of Uganda. (Ideally, that section should be a summary of the history article, but people tend to add new content directly to the country article, resulting in a disconnect between the two.) I would also recommend you try your hand at adding citations for new content that you add. (See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) Referenced material is more likely to last, and also helps readers who want to learn more about the subject. Let me know if you want some help figuring out how to make references.

I don't mind long pages, though I'll probably archive this page shortly anyway. Cheers, BanyanTree 05:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)