Wikipedia

User talk:TCN7JM/Archive 3

< User talk:TCN7JM
Latest comment: 11 years ago by J Milburn in topic WikiCup 2013 February newsletter
Archive

Archives

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6
7 – 8 – 9 – 10 – 11
12 – 13 – 14 – 15 – 16
Current
vn-2This user talk page has been vandalized 2 times.

This is my talk page. Please respect the guidelines and sign your posts, blah, blah, blah, etc., etc...

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion


Wikidata weekly summary #43

 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment on the Hebrew and Italian Wikipedia ([1] [2] [3])
    • Switched the Wikipedias over to a new, more scalable dispatching changes script for propagating changes from the repository to the clients
    • Fixing various deeply buried bugs and a few minor bugs reported after deployment
    • Preparations for next deployment on wikidata.org
    • Working on property parser function for the client
    • Implemented robust serialization of changes for dispatching
    • Resumed work on linked data interface
    • References can now be created, edited and removed on existing statements
    • Several minor user interface fixes
    • Styling of the user interface for statements
    • Selenium tests for references
    • Selenium tests for non-JS SpecialPages
    • Worked on puppet
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Open Tasks for You
    • Test statements on the [demo system before the roll-out to wikidata.org on February 4
    • Hack on one of these
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 13:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

K-11

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

[6] —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:41, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #44

 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment of the first parts of phase 2 (infoboxes/statements) on wikidata.org done - see it live for example here, here and here
    • Diffs for statement edits can now be shown
    • Started work on query definitions
    • Edit links are now disabled in the interface when the user does not have the rights to edit
    • Edit links are now hidden when viewing old revision
    • Worked on search field for WikibaseSolr
    • More work on Lua templates for Wikibase entities
    • Worked on bugfixes in the statement user interface
    • New features in the statement user interface (references counter/heading)
    • JavaScript editing for table showing labels and description of the same item in different languages
    • Repaired and updated the demo system
    • Resumed work on Linked Data interface
    • Support for enhanced recent changes format in client
    • There are automatic comments for statement edits as well in the history now
    • Special page for unconnected pages, that is pages on the client that are not connected to items on the repository
    • Added permission checks for statements, so a user that can not edit will not be able to edit or that only a group can be allowed to do some changes like creating statements
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
    • FOSDEM
    • upcoming: office hour (English; German later)
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
  • Open Tasks for You
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 16:09, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

FCB

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there, may I know why you rejected the edit on that page? If you refer to the colour plate of the jerseys put up during the previous edit, you would see that there are no blue and white jerseys. The blue and red jerseys are seen just before it goes on to 1970s. Cheers, Arctic Kangaroo 01:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey, my bad. I'm doing a little RC patrolling and I may have been a little trigger happy there. –TCN7JM 01:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Never mind, just be more cautious in future. Everyone makes mistakes.   Arctic Kangaroo 01:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Moved, see User:TCN7JM#Last but not least, my awards

Rollback

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello, this is just to let you know that I've granted you Rollback rights. Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A kitten for you!

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
 

HERE YOU GO! A KITTEN!! :)

Lukeskywalker12345 (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

What, you think this is going to make me stop reverting you? –TCN7JM 19:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Donna Pescow

Latest comment: 11 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

HI! I am trying to upload a new photo for Donna Pescow on her page with HER PERMISSION. Please instruct me on who to do this! thanks! - Nyyankbrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyyankbrian (talk • contribs) 21:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

  1. Please put stuff at the bottom of the page in a new section, like I just did.
  2. Simply typing in the person's name with Image in front of it and .jpg at the end doesn't magically generate a photo. You have to take the photo and upload it to the Wikimedia Commons. Then you can upload it to the article.
  3. I'd suggest using the Show preview button rather than making a bunch of test edits.
That is all. –TCN7JM 21:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I will put my info at the bottom of the page as you suggest and upload the photo to WIKIPEDIA COMMONS. Now I'm trying to find out how to do THAT! Ms. Pescow is awaiting...thanks. - Nyyankbrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyyankbrian (talk • contribs) 21:48, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
It's not that hard. Just go to the Wikimedia Commons linked above and hit the link on the left side of the page entitled Upload file. Then follow the directions the Upload Wizard page gives you to upload the file. Oh, and you can sign your comments by putting four tildes (~) at the end of your post. –TCN7JM 21:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
TCN7JM, while I think you're in the right by reverting Nyyankbrian when he removes the picture in question, I would steer clear of that article for the time being. –Fredddie™ 22:39, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
If you have her permission, it must be forwarded to WP:OTRS, or it will not be considered valid. --Rschen7754 23:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Please, I do not want to be blocked. I have a new photo of Donna (Pescow) and I am working o her behalf with her permission. I did as you advised, and place the code in the bottom of the script. She does NOT want the old photo posted! Thank you. - Nyyankbrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyyankbrian (talk • contribs) 22:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Blanking an IP's page

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Oh, I blanked it? I'm sorry...to be honest with you, I can't remember. Should I undo it, or did you already restore the page?The Triple M (talk) 22:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Just undo it. –TCN7JM 22:58, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, OK...The Triple M (talk) 02:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Recent Page Edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm sorry if this isn't the place for this, but I just edited a page, and you undid it. You said it was not constructive to the article. In the article it says that 3,000,000,000 people died in the San Francisco earthquake in 1906. That number seemed a little odd to me, so I looked into it (including the external article that it linked to.) They all agree on 3,000. If I made a mistake, posting this or otherwise, feel free to correct me/it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.142.244 (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

No. That's my bad. I just thought 3,000 looked low. I thought the article read 3,000,000, not 3,000,000,000. Go ahead an revert. –TCN7JM 23:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Kelowna

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. You recently reverted an IP contribution to Kelowna that was actually an explained removal of content that was valid in my opinion. Please notice edit summaries before reverting these edits using Huggle; you revert can discourage the IP from editing Wikipedia now. Take time when using Huggle, thanks. TBrandley (what's up) 01:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

  1. I noticed the edit summary.
  2. I left a note on the IP's talk page saying why I put the chart back.
  3. I didn't realize there was already another chart there.
I realize I'm in the wrong here, but I must say I am a bit insulted that you felt the need to bold and italicize the word "explain." I will be more careful with my reverts in the future. –TCN7JM 01:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Blanking an IP's page

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ok, I undid it. To be honest with you, I didn't even know that I blanked it. My laptop must have spazzed out or something, because I didn't mean to, seriously. Sorry about that, anyway.The Triple M (talk) 02:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You beat me a few times too! Keep fighting the good fight :-)

Thanks, TheSuave 02:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #45

 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Deployment to English Wikipedia
    • Fix various minor bugs in client, including watchlist toggle with preference to default to always show Wikidata edits
    • Added the new Baso Minangkabau Wikipedia (min)
    • Fixed wrong revision of statements being shown in diff and old revision view
    • Diff visualization for claims (simple version for main snak)
    • Diff visualization for claims (extended version for references, qualifiers, ranks)
    • Tooltip that notifies about the license your contributions will be covered by while editing (can be disabled by each user)
    • Started with valueview refactoring
    • Started with user interface handling of deleted properties
    • Started with refactoring of local partial entity lookup
    • Started with refactoring of toolbar usage in jQuery.wikibase view widgets
    • Finished improvement on jQuery.wikibase.claimview’s edit mode handling
    • Improved search by using entity selector in search field instead of normal MediaWiki search field
    • More work on Lua-based templates for entities
    • Specified the capabilities of the query language we need
    • Created query object
    • Proper bot-flagging of edits (bugzilla:44857)
    • Use of ID to directly address an item or property
    • Search should give more of the complete matches now
    • Special:ItemByTitle should work for canonical namespaces and later on for local namespaces
    • More robust format for notifications of changes on the repository to the client
    • Started work on refactoring API and autocomments code
    • Started to maintain documentation of configuration options in git
  • Discussions/Press
  • Events
    • Upcoming: Wikipedia Day NYC
    • Upcoming: office hour in English tomorrow
    • Note: changed day of next German office hour to March 8
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • We have a time scheduled when Wikidata will be read-only for a database migration. The window for that is Feb 20 19:00 to Feb 21 2:00 UTC.
    • New features and bugfixes on Wikidata are planned to be deployed on Monday (Feb 18). This should among other things include:
      • Showing useful diffs for edits of claims (they’re currently empty)
      • Automatic comments for editing of claims (there are currently none)
      • Ability to add items to claims by their ID
      • Better handling of deleted properties
      • More results in the entity selector (that’s the thing that lets you select properties, items and so on) so you can add everything and not just the first few matches that are shown
    • We’re still working on the issue that sometimes editing of certain parts of items or properties isn’t possible. If you’re running into it try to reload the page and/or change the URL to the www. version or the non-www. version respectively.
    • Deployment on all other Wikipedias is currently planned for March 6 (a note to the Village Pumps of all affected projects will follow soon)
    • Check out a well-done item
  • Open Tasks for You
  • Help expand en:Wikipedia:Wikidata
  • Help expand and translate Wikidata/Deployment Questions
  • Hack on one these
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 21:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Pure Mathematics: 17 Feb 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi TCN7JM, thanks very much for your feedback on my edit to pure mathematics. I have added more content to the top of the article; take a look and see it seems more constructive. Send me a message if you don't think it's up to snuff, and you can tell me what you think it's missing. --Hierarchivist (talk) 06:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

This one is better. I reverted your original edit because you added random small text and removed referenced information. Also, in the future, please add new sections at the bottom of the page. –TCN7JM 07:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Moved, see User:TCN7JM#Last but not least, my awards

Empty categories

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Please just add {{db-c1}} to empty categories, rather than starting a full discussion. – Fayenatic London 20:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I honestly didn't mean to save the message multiple times. My computer was playing up and not saving, and suddenly it saved multiple copies. Sorry for causing offence, but it was an accident. – Fayenatic London 20:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
It's okay, I guess. I just don't have much patience at all today. Sort of a coincidence seeing how I message-spammed the CfD page. –TCN7JM 20:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I can see that it must have looked sarcastic. – Fayenatic London 21:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Road categories

Latest comment: 11 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I believe these empty categories were emptied manually. As such they don't qualify for speedy deletion and should go through the normal CfD process so that we can figure out what happened. Best, Pichpich (talk) 20:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Start making sense, guys. I'd like to know what exactly I'm supposed to do and you guys are giving me two different opinions. –TCN7JM 20:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Now that Pichpich has raised an objection, we should leave the discussion to run its course. If you tag any more, please do it as {{subst:cfd|Category:Roads by year of opening}} so that they link to the same section on the discussion page. Then you can just add a line within the discussion. – Fayenatic London 21:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Is that possible with Twinkle, or should I just tag them manually? –TCN7JM 21:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't know, I don't use TW. BTW, I put a page into the 2001 category while I was looking around before I read what had happened. I've stated support for deletion anyway. – Fayenatic London 21:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Message-spamming

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

No worries. I just created a few as we had a few others, and it seemed the thing to do. I have no opinion on their deletion one way or the other.

As for the spamming - don't worry about it. Doesn't bother me in the least. :-)

Happy editing! --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Yes...

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

"If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page."

Yes I do. why? WazzaAzzaw (talk) 23:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I have been accused of being narrow-minded but I never believe people who tell me that they blanked the entire page and replaced it with something on accident. –TCN7JM 00:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Well maybe I pressed Ctrl-A by accident before writing and thus cleared the page.
Apology accepted. WazzaAzzaw (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Nope. –TCN7JM 00:08, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


Jim O' Rear

Latest comment: 11 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

I believe that I actually have explained why. The use has taken it upon himself to arbitrarily delete a nomination for speedy deletion, he has responded to a number of citation requests by citing IMDB against Wiki policy, Barnes and Noble (also against policy), his own personal web site as a source, as well as numerous pages that make no mention of that which is supposedly being cited. The subject entry (and very likely the author of these entries) is filling his page with a great number of bogus film credits to add to his own obscure film credits. His notability as the subject of a Wikipedia entry is negligible, give his obscure film credits. If you take a look at the history and the questions regarding this subject, you may conclude that this is essentially a vanity page for someone whose notability is questionable at best. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them. Thank you! (67.234.177.82 (talk) 02:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC))

I explained myself on your talk page, and I'm continuing the discussion there. –TCN7JM 02:12, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Well, when the user knowingly and repeatedly cites bogus sources and knowingly uses an entry to self promote and offers fake film credits, and continues to do so after he has been informed politely about it, wouldn't that constitute "vandalism." and that last tag for speedy deletion, regardless of whether it was place properly or not also states not to remove, and yet he did arbitrarily, but perhaps you didn't read that. If you feel that I am not as acclimated to the rules as you are, and I admit that is likely the case, then perhaps you could be helpful and guide me through the process of attempting to bring editorial scrutiny to an entry that may not be notable and may be a vanity page. my intentions in this matter are honest and I may need to be adopted by a more seasoned editor, so that I may properly deal with entries such as this in the future. What would I have to do now to nominate the article for deletion in accordance with wiki policy? I do appreciate your help and the time and diligence you've shown. Thank you. (67.234.177.82 (talk) 02:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC))
No, no. You're correct. Adding the sources over and over again isn't vandalism, though. It's annoying, yes, but not really vandalism, just failing to get the point. If he hasn't added the links since you reverted them, then there's no reason for hostility. Also, the AFD tag wasn't misplaced...it just wasn't an AFD tag. That was a user warning message. –TCN7JM 02:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Also, for how to nominate a page for deletion, consult this page. It should help better than I can. –TCN7JM 02:50, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

It appears that the subject entry (Jim O' Rear) is edit warring and deleting my edits with no explanation. Somebody really needs to look at his edit history, as well as his fraudulent film credits which have used his personal web site, IMDB (where anyone can readily edit the information), dubious fan pages, Amazon, and Barnes & Noble for citation. If you look at the history and edits, it's pretty clear that this is a self-penned vanity page that does not adhere to Wikipedia protocol and the entry subject's notability is seriously suspect. Can some scrutiny be applied to this page? (67.234.177.82 (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC))

I'll talk to him on his talk page. –TCN7JM 22:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #46

 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Something...I don't really know

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

pls dont edit y page whether it looks bad or notUser:Akhil160896 —Preceding undated comment added 17:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Your message to me

Whether you liked my comment is irrelevent - you are censoring the truth (or your administrator "Gobo" is censoring the truth). Everyone in the flight sim hobby knows about the issues with Tom Allensworth and I portrayed this is a fair way, with citations to flightsim.com. But your man "Gobo" is part of AVSIM, and so him reviewing the comments of the AVSIM entry is laughable. He has allowed absolutely no negative aspects whatsoever - the AVSIM record on Wiki is like one big advert for AVSIM (even for their conference this year). It's so unprofessional. Jim, this really is BELOW wiki and what it stands for. This is corporate American bullying and censorship. I have donated $100 to Wiki for the last 3 years and this is my first experience of trying to edit and update a page; and it has been a real ugly experience. You will not permit ANY negative comments (whether cited or not) about AVSIM because you fear Tom Allensworth. I will be escalating this issue to the top.

Taylor page

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi TCN7JM, you marked a page I created for speedy deletion. As it was my first page (apart from some edits) I hope you can review my 'why it should not be deleted' reasons and perhaps give me a bit more time/pointers to make the page better. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maarteno (talk • contribs) 19:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect A1 tagging at Taming of the Shrew Act 3

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I wanted to note that your A1 tagging of Taming of the Shrew Act 3 and corresponding talk page message at User talk:GrandmaLemon were incorrect and unhelpful, giving this user the false impression that it was correct to re-create their article with more detail. There was more than enough context in this article (or even the title alone) to clearly identify its subject. Please reserve A1 only for articles where there is not enough context to identify the subject, per WP:CSD. Dcoetzee 01:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay. I'll remember that. I didn't just pick this out of random, though. I couldn't find a proper CSD tag, even though the article clearly shouldn't exist. Can you tell me which tag I should have used? –TCN7JM 01:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
There is no speedy deletion criterion suitable for deleting "essay" articles like this one, and it's not completely clear that it should be deleted, as it could conceivably be rewritten in the proper format, although this would obviously be a lot of work. Please feel free to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taming of the Shrew Act 3. Dcoetzee 01:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

  1.   Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
  2.   Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
  3.   Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with   Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by   The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 00:58, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TCN7JM/Archive_3&oldid=1146614315"