User talk:Thumperward/Archive 52

Archive 45

←

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

Congratulations

Here's your free T-shirt!

Enjoy a T-shirt to don as you perform administrator duties! (X! · talk)  · @794  ·  18:03, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well; use the tools well. CT Cooper · talk 18:09, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

And from me. Let me know if I can be of assistance. At least now I won't have so many bloody {{editprotected}} request to deal with! ;) Any time you fancy helping out at category:Wikipedia protected edit requests, it would be appreciated. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:13, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thumperward (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) My admin log

Congratulations!

It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • IRC admin channel (#wikipedia-en-admins connect) Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Congrats from me as well. Connormah^talk 18:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Chris, I think I owe it to you to stop by and add myself to those providing congratulations. I realize that I may have come across as a little harsh towards you, and I want to make it very clear that I really meant it when I said that I appreciated the comment you made to me during the RfA and that I genuinely wish you well going forward. Who knows, maybe I just ran into you on a bad day. For what it's worth, I hope that, as you go forward, you will think seriously about making sure that your comments to others will be perceived by them as courteous and patient. If you do, I have no doubts at all that you will make wonderful contributions as an administrator. Happy editing, and happy mopping! --Tryptofish (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations. Welcome to Hell :) Black Kite (t) (c) 19:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats! I'm proud to have supported you, and glad you made it. As I said in my comments to Trypto (who I greatly respect) I felt that while you were a bit "snippy" at times, that you would make a good admin. Here's hoping you will prove me right... Best wishes on your adminship! Jusdafax 20:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulation!!! Mop well, and be well. --j⚛e decker^talk 20:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
• Grats. Good call, WP... :> Doc9871 (talk) 21:32, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
• I know you're going to miss going through a 4th one of those, but membership in the cabal has its privileges. Welcome! - Dank (push to talk) 00:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
• Glad to see this. While we've had disagreements in the past, I'm in no doubt that you will fully justify Rlevse's closing rationale. Regards, --WFC-- 01:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
• Very pleased to see you were successful - Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
• Awesome. Glad I was finally able to catch your RFA while it was actually open. :) It's always good to have another target...I mean admin! --Aervanath (talk) 16:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for all the kind words, folks, and for your support. Real Life has caught up with me this week, but as soon as I get that in order I'll start getting to grips with the tools and seeing what I can do to help out! :) Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

• I guess third time is the charm. Glad to see another editor who is very active in the template namespace finally get the tools. ...and I guess I'll have to work on creating some additional {{edit protected}} backlog so there'll be enough work to go around now ;) --Tothwolf (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

• Unbelievable. Rvelse has really dropped the ball here. MickMacNee (talk) 00:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

  Out of interest, why's that? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 07:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

• Congrats - sorry I missed the RfA. Let me know if I can help in anyway. Ben MacDui 13:04, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

lead too short?

I'm not sure what you consider to be missing from the intro to the article on the latest in a growing list of ex-Gillingham players in prison. The murder was not of such high profile that it would be mentionable but for the career path of the offender, his career was not so staellar that it has highlights to summarise in the lead. It says that he was a footballer, but he's now been convicted of murder: what more is necessary to make a reader decide whether they wish top read the remainder of the article? Kevin McE (talk) 13:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The lede is supposed to be an adequate summary of the important points of the article, not just a bare minimum of context. At the very least his clubs should be listed. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Check text, please

I've written the usual short para on RfAs at the SP draft for next week's edition. Please let me know if I haven't got the very summarised passage balanced correctly. Here. Tony (talk) 17:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Thanks for the write-up! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Question (irrelevant to Wikipedia) I didn't see an answer to on your user page

I was curious, what do you do for Sun Microsystems? I'm studying computers in school (I'd like to put that knowledge to use someday), and I was curious about what you do because I haven't talked to anyone employed by a computer company (a major one, anyway), and of course considering my major I'll probably do computer work in the future as well. Thanks for your answer. --Evice (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I work on Solaris in a data center environment at the moment, monitoring the company's internal systems (the network of computers that keeps the company running). Basically, if a server component, OS or the software running on top breaks or malfunctions then I've got to fix that. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 07:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. That would probably be a little more complex than what I've been learning how to do, which was dealing more with individual machines (and mostly just home computers or workstations and not servers) instead of groups of them, so I probably wouldn't be suited to what you do. --Evice (talk) 17:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

You pick it up. :) When I was your age I'd just graduated from uni and did ISP technical support; I've gradually built up my skills since. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 18:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:AFC Asian Cup winners

Template:AFC Asian Cup winners has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages (last change).

Regards, --WFC-- 22:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

You are receiving this message because of your participation in this discussion, now continued at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Microformats. –xeno^talk 13:44, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Cquotetxt

Thumperward, today I come to my former discussions see their formatting all in ruins because you had blanked {{Cquotetxt}} and redirected it to another template.

Who authorized you to delete and redirect this template without a previous discussion? The fact that you are an administrator does not mean that you own Wikipedia or have the right to ruin its layout. In fact, last time I checked, you admins are supposed to be our model of behavior. (And certainly you won't be happy to see me running around deleting and redirecting every random template without a previous discussion, call it "MERGE" and then saying "It was a correct thing to do because Thumperward did it"!)

All right administrator Thumperward, you have your BOLD, and you have your REVERT. I trust you know about WP:BRD, don't you? Fleet Command (talk) 06:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Erm, mind your attitude. I'm "authorised" to boldly merge templates by virtue of being an editor in good standing on the project who (usually) knows what he's doing. Furthermore, this edit was made over a month before I became an admin. Have you any actual argument for why this fork exists? How does merging it "ruin" the formatting of your "discussions"? Provide a test case and if it's compelling I'll see what I can do to ensure that you aren't inconvenienced. Otherwise I'll take it to TfD as an unneeded fork of the existing quote templates. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 13:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you are authorized to perform bold changes but only to the extent allowed by WP:BRD and WP:SILENCE. You did your BOLD (B) and I did my REVERT (R). Now, if you are still willing to delete template, you have to follow Deletion process, which is a codified consensus between all Wikipedians. Once you started a deletion discussion (D) as outlined by this guideline, I will be more than glad to provide test cases. Otherwise, blanking templates is presence of evidences of lack consensus is not an acceptable behavior, be it from a Wikipedian in good standing or otherwise one with bad standing.

And please stop using the term "merge"; it does not apply here. This is a case of blanking/redirect not merge. Fleet Command (talk) 13:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

If you've got a legitimate reason for the fork then just spit it out here; there's no need for a formal discussion process when we're already in conversation. IMO you're making rather a big deal out of nothing, and I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing by it. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 14:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Legitimate reason for fork? It's a template not an article; WP:CFORK does not apply. It's a useful tool used in Wikipedia. It is you who should provide a reason.

IMHO you are looking down at me as if I am a vermin or who has less rights than you do. Please kindly respect Wikipedia guidelines: If you want this template deleted, nominate it in TfD. And remember, Administrators are supposed to be a model of behavior for other Wikipedians; so please do not do what you yourself wouldn't like to see me doing. Fleet Command (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Template forks are generally discouraged as they duplicate effort and introduce inconsistency; argument #2 on the TfD "reasons to delete" addresses this. The guidelines are there to provide some semblance of order, but they are not immutable rules that have to be followed. I didn't expect you to have it demanded that I take a template to TfD in order to try to prise your argument for reverting out of you. I don't really know what your fascination with my being an administrator is about: I haven't used the tools in this discussion and how I respond to people I don't know from Adam turning up on my talk page to patronise me is largely irrelevant to my competence in that regard. Nevertheless, if I can be bothered I'll take this to TfD at some point. I do hope that makes you happy. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 19:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

a template arg parsing issue...

Hi. I'd be interested in comments concerning how a template arg might be parsed into two chunks; typically some data and then a ref are being passed as a piece and it's resulting in poor rendering due to a unit being glued onto the end.

• WT:WikiProject Astronomical objects#starbox template issue

Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied over there. It's theoretically doable, but not worth the effort compared to taking the easy route and getting a bot to fix the articles IMO. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 07:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox film

Hi Chris, dunno if you've seen my message on the talk page yet but I managed to drop a bollock with my sandbox code. Can you have another look please? Cheers! PC78 (talk) 10:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Re-synced. Gracias. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Hans Zimmer

Thanks, I'm going to request semi-protection if this is added again.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Good call. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 14:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk archives

Hello, Thumperward. You have new messages at Funandtrvl's talk page.
Message added 15:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Template:Singapore Statute

I recently did a major update to {{Singapore Statute}} and thought it was working fine, but just noticed that the template inserts an extra space in front of the title of a statute if |titlelink= is used:

Wikitext: ({{Singapore Statute|title=Penal Code|cap=224|ed=2008}})

Result: (Penal Code (Cap. 224, 2008 Rev. Ed.))

Wikitext: ({{Singapore Statute|title=Penal Code|titlelink=Penal Code (Singapore)|cap=224|ed=2008}})

Result: (Penal Code (Cap. 224, 2008 Rev. Ed.))

Note the space between the left parenthesis and "Penal Code" in the second example. In the first example, when |titlelink= is not used, the problem does not occur. If you have time, can you see if you can figure out what's wrong? Thanks very much. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 21:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Just the parser moaning about whitespace, as usual. It's best to avoid using whitespace to tidy code up on Wikipedia unless you know the parser is going to ignore it. I've reformatted the template and this should be fixed now. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 21:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I thought the parser did ignore whitespace, but obviously I was wrong about that! Thanks very much. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 07:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Yeah, it usually does, except when it doesn't. The way it's treated newlines has changed repeatedly over the years, for instance. No matter. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Thumperward! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Malcolm Kpedekpo - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 08:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Circlip

Hi Thumper; why'd you put a dubious note on the Jesus clip statement when it's got three references? A note on the talk page would be much appreciated. Thanks! Wizard191 (talk) 13:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied over there. Thanks for the note. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 13:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk archives+

Hello, Thumperward. You have new messages at Funandtrvl's talk page.
Message added 21:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

BS 1363

Please review the discussion about folding plugs on the BS 1363 discussion page. Deucharman (talk) 10:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Replied over there. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Legislation/images

If you have time, your help with {{Infobox Legislation/images}} would be much appreciated. The Parliament of Singapore moved to a new building with effect from 6 September 1999, so I thought it would be great if I could get {{Infobox Legislation}} to automatically display an image of Old Parliament House if the date that a piece of legislation was enacted (indicated by |dateenacted=) was before 6 September 1999, and an image of the present Parliament House if the date of enactment was on or after that date. I figured that this should be fairly straightforward (see the "SINGAPORE" section of {{Infobox Legislation/images/sandbox}}), but for some reason it is not working (see {{Infobox Legislation/testcases}}). Any idea why? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 20:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

You've predicated the change in flag on {{infobox Legislation/images/sandbox}} being given a gsd attribute. No such attribute is being passed to it. Remember that sub-templates do not automatically inherit any values from their parents; everything must be manually specified. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 20:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, could you explain that to me in simpler language? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 07:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

My bad, I meant "dateenacted" and not "gsd". Anyway, rather than trying to explain it I've just fixed it. Have a look at the test cases page. Neat piece of code, by the way; very clever. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

...while you're at it, the same switching technique will work fine for the image caption as well; are you planning on implementing that too, or do you want me to give it a bash? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Will have a look at what you did. Sure, you're welcome to go ahead and get your hands dirty! — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 10:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Had a look at your tweaks to {{Infobox Legislation/sandbox}} and {{Infobox Legislation/images/sandbox}}, and the light bulb illuminated. It's so obvious now that I've seen what you did. However, when I view {{Infobox Legislation/testcases}}, for some reason the image of Old Parliament House does not appear, even after I've cleared my cache. Instead, I see a hyperlink to the filename. Any idea what is happening here? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 10:18, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

The image server's probably playing up. What size do you have your image thumbnails set to? Occasionally the image server barfs when trying to create a new thumbnail. I can verify that it's working fine here at any rate. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

If you can see it, then that's fine. Hopefully it's a transient issue. By the way, I noticed you changed the default image size (or, rather, you removed the forced default size of 180px). Is that the norm? Of course, with my default set at 300px it makes the infobox image very large indeed ... ;-) — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 10:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the use of {{gsd}}: I surprised myself. I was trying to think of a simple way to determine if one date was before or after another, and this was what came to mind. Not sure if there's any simpler way. Anyway, it seems to work quite well. I first used it at {{Singapore Hansard}}. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 10:32, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

The norm is to display images at the user's chosen thumbnail size, which is what frameless does. If you've got your default size set really high (as you do) then this might be a little disconcerting, but gradually every infobox is moving to use this for images.. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

i4gotemplt4XPANDintro,sory

[1]-----Please note, I have [[Repetitive Strain Injury]] and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 07:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

It's {{lead too short}} (or just {{tooshort}}). If you've got Twinkle enabled you can add tags using the "Tag" tab. I've swapped the tag on that article: thanks! Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

usdit![2]'d"submit"butn a.be o/top>acesibl?-----Please note, I have [[Repetitive Strain Injury]] and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 00:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

If you've got suggestions for how to improve the accessibility of the tool you could try bringing it up on the tool's talk page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 09:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

wp:d+[[?

[3]-----Please note, I have [[Repetitive Strain Injury]] and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 03:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Locomotive

See Template_talk:Infobox_locomotive#Imagesize. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi also Template:Infobox train - I've changed the default back to 300px - the issue is that with a thumbnail sized image some boxes end up with text that is over a page long...Sf5xeplus (talk) 04:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes)#Design_and_usage "Standard suggested width of 300 pixels or 25 ems (300px or 25em in CSS)."

I don't know how many infoboxes you've changed, but please don't do it, especially without asking. Changing the width messes up formatting for people who have put data in infoboxes in articles assuming the standard width will be 300 px as it was.

By the way another editor is assuming that your edits were WP:BOLD see Template talk:Infobox train - I don't know if this was the case. Please note that though I found the change of the default image size to be counterproductive, I have no objection to be being changed following a discussion. It's just that there was no warning, or announcement of the change - I only just worked out why some articles were looking terrible. Also you didn't update the documentation.

Perhaps the recommended infobox size (25em) is too big ?

Sf5xeplus (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The guideline is long out-of-date and doesn't reflect current convention; it's the guideline which needs fixed, not the infoboxes. By far the most common layout these days is width: 22em; text-align: left; font-size: 88%; line-height: 1.5em, which is the default styling of {{infobox}}. Putting it mildly, the train boxes are not exactly on the cutting edge of template design. I'll continue discussion over there. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 09:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite Block and Ban Discussion of Sven70

I'm not sure if you've seen it, but as I know you're involved with this editor, you might want to weigh in at AN/I concerning the current situation. Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 08:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I suppose this was inevitable, sadly. Cheers for the heads-up. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem! While I reluctantly support the ban, I knew he needed dissenting opinions in the ban discussion, and knew that you were a supporter of his staying on WP (with help). It's about fairness to me, and he has no voice there to defend himself, being blocked. Cheers, Chris! :> Doc9871 (talk) 10:48, 24 August 2010 (UTC)