![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Qxz-ad84.gif)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Make it better; do an FA review. ( ) |
Smile!
Thanks
Deletation of article
Problems with neutrality of article
Hi! You helped me out twice before and I thought that you could again. If you have other things to do I won't bother you again.
I objected to the article 'Persian people' because it was biased, unfair and Contained factually wrong statements. You told me to share my concerns on the discussion page of the article and include a token that stated that the neutrality of the article was disputed. I have done all of that, where do I go from here? How can I get the article deleted and replaced with the correct one that was in place before they change it?
Thanks agains
Notice
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You may at any time by removing the {{newmessages}} template.
Message
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
50 AWB tasks reassigned (to you)
The U.S. State article lists in the form "List of x-related topics" (where x is the name of a state) have been changed to "Index of x-related topics". The links in the encyclopedia need to be updated.
For each state AWB needs to be used to make a list of "what links here" specifying "List of x-related topics". Then filter down the list to the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces.
Then set the search/replace feature to find "List of x-related topics" and replace it with "Index of x-related articles".
If there's a way to integrate these tasks so as to do fewer runs (50 is a lot), more power to ya! :) Like copying the search/replace string and typing in the 50 state names into them all at once in the search/replace section.
If you have questions, comments, problems, etc., please chat me up on my talk page.
The Transhumanist 04:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be able to help if you need any assistance. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Looking at his contributions shows that Robert Skyhawk hasn't been around for over a month. We definitely need somebody else to do these. I guess that means you. :)
- The make list steps of all the tasks can be combined (by entering all the pagenames and clicking "make list" after each entry). That way, you only have to use the list filter once. Likewise, the search/replace strings for each link to be replaced should all be entered before you press "start". By setting AWB up in this way, you should be able to do all 50 states in one pass.
- Good luck.
- Have fun.
- And if you learn any shortcuts or better ways of doing this, please let me know!
- The Transhumanist 20:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, got it (for the most part). There is one part that I don't quite understand, however:
- "For each state AWB needs to be used to make a list of "what links here" specifying "List of x-related topics". Then filter down the list to the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces."
- Could you explain this further? Thanks. –Juliancolton | Talk 20:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Since the time I wrote that, I figured out how to combine the tasks into a single pass on AWB.
- The goal of the task is to change the links "List of Alabama-related topics", "List of Arkansas-related topics", etc. (wherever they appear in pages in the article, portal, and wikipedia namespaces) to "Index of Alabama-related articles", "Index of Arkansas-related articles", etc.
- So, start AWB and use the make list feature. From the selection of list types available, click "What links here". Then in the input box, type "List of Alabama-related topics" (without the quotation marks). Then click "make list" or press Enter.
- Then before you do anything else, repeat the above step for the remaining states. ("List of Alaska-related topics", "List of Arkansas-related topics", etc.) The list you are making will grow each time. (Tip: instead of typing the whole thing in each time, you can paste "List of -related topics" and fill in the state name).
- When you are done building the list, you need to filter it. At the bottom of the make list section is the filter feature. Click on it, which should bring up the filter window. It lets you choose which namespaces you want included or excluded from the list you just made. Select the namespaces you want to keep (main, portal, and wikipedia), and then activate the filter. It will remove all unwanted pages from the page list.
- When you are done filtering the list, then you need to set up the search/replaces. Enter in all 50 of them into the search/replace feature of AWB.
- Once those are entered, you are ready to rock and roll. Press "Start".
- Good luck. Have fun.
- Let me know if you need further assistance.
- The Transhumanist 21:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Important: I just remembered, there's a problem with Georgia (because of the country by that name). You'll need to use "List of Georgia (U.S. state)-related topics" and "Index of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles". Sorry I forgot about that. That could have been disastrous. The Transhumanist 21:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I already noticed that. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 22:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Important: I just remembered, there's a problem with Georgia (because of the country by that name). You'll need to use "List of Georgia (U.S. state)-related topics" and "Index of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles". Sorry I forgot about that. That could have been disastrous. The Transhumanist 21:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps You Can Help...
A few of us at WP:TVS are having a problem with User:Theaveng adding copyrighted information to List of television stations in North America by media market. The information has to do with the Nielsen Television Markets. The user has been adding information from the FCC (which is exactly alike to the information Nielsen uses). To avoid being in violation of OTRS ticket #2008091610055854, the information is removed. For whatever reason User:Theaveng readds it. The user has been warned multiple times and had stopped, but started up again today. I reverted and issued a Warn4im warning. I brought this to User:Powergate92 (who has been involved in talk page discussions about this and who I thought was an admin) and he sugguested I bring it to an admin. Since you are the only one available at the moment, I bring this to your attention and ask what should be done. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 14, 2009 @ 21:42
- That is the one that was plastered on all the histories of all the stations in September of last year. This is one of the links where the OTRS ticket was used back in '08. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 14, 2009 @ 21:52
- Okie Dokie. Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk • April 14, 2009 @ 22:05
Hi Julian. Nothing to change in the above AfD. Just a head's up - after this discussion we are looking to ensure AfD discussions go for seven days. SNOW closes are no longer seen as appropriate. Early closes should follow the guidelines in WP:Speedy keep or WP:Speedy delete. Regards SilkTork *YES! 07:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I felt that since consensus had been clearly established, IAR was applicable. I am quite astonished that a rule discouraging SNOW closes has been set, but that's bureaucracy for ya. :) Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 14:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- I know what you're saying! But people feel that not everyone is on Wiki every day, so a full 7 days (therefore including a weekend) is really needed for a full consensus. SNOW was designed to cut through "pointless" bureaucracy, but the new rule actually makes sense so SNOW doesn't apply to AfDs. There's going to be a few people who are not aware of the new situation, so there'll be more SNOW closes over the next few days. They are not worth over-turning, but the closers should be made aware that the situation has changed. SilkTork *YES! 17:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, I'll keep that in mind. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 17:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- I know what you're saying! But people feel that not everyone is on Wiki every day, so a full 7 days (therefore including a weekend) is really needed for a full consensus. SNOW was designed to cut through "pointless" bureaucracy, but the new rule actually makes sense so SNOW doesn't apply to AfDs. There's going to be a few people who are not aware of the new situation, so there'll be more SNOW closes over the next few days. They are not worth over-turning, but the closers should be made aware that the situation has changed. SilkTork *YES! 17:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thomas R. Vozzella
Hello, I would be very happy to have the article deleted. This has been one of the worst experiences ever. I think my colleague is a very worthwhile musician, and has given and excelled in the church/choral world. Can you just delete it and end the humiliation of the constant badgering. Don't ruin him, because of my inability to write the Wikipedia way. I have tried most of the morning to blank the page, etc. and people keep putting it back. I have followed every suggestion, made every change as I understood them, and it has become more of an unpleasant experience. Thanks, and again, just delete it. MusicTex (talk) 16:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Terrillja talk 18:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
RfA Thankspam
Thanks to everyone who took the time and trouble to take part in my RfA whether support, oppose or neutral. All comments are valued and will be considered carefully in the coming weeks. Feel free to add more advice on my talk page if you think I need it. SpinningSpark 22:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC) In case you're wondering, the image is a smiley, just a little more aesthetic, but not as serious as the Mona Lisa |
![]() |
Merge and transwiki
Hi. On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unification Church political views you closed it by saying "Merge and transwiki." I was the one who nominated it for deletion. How is this going to happen? Much of the material is already on Wikiquote. Steve Dufour (talk) 02:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm going to start on this by moving the quotes to Wikiquote.Steve Dufour (talk) 15:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikiprojects in signature
Hi, am I right in thinking that your customized signature used to link to a Wikiproject? If so, was there a reason you stopped doing so? Cheers. — R2 03:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- OK, it's nothing important. I was considering doing a similar thing, I thought you did it once, and maybe someone told you to remove it or something. I'm not going to be around forever and I'm concerned about the future of WP:MJJ without me. Not that I'm trying to be big headed. We have a healthy number of helpers, but only have 3-4 editors (including myself) that can write articles to GA standard. I was hoping to recruit more people by highlighting the project, we had a few more editors join when Jackson announced his concerts. — R2 15:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Another deletion
Can you delete File:Assemblyman Jim Tedisco (R-NY).jpg? It's a redundant of another file on Commons (both taken from this and agreed upon for deletion). ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 11:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
My request
Thanks for the very prompt response to request for rollback.--Sabrebd (talk) 14:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Do not read this one - The Hunt - Outline of knowledge WikiProject - 04/17/2009
While surveying libraries, their outline-related resources, and our coverage of them, I came across something funny...
What subclass is the Bible in the Library of Congress Classification?
Do you think they'd like this one at WP:DYK?
(Nope. They didn't.) :)
Libraries
For months, I've been sitting at a terminal in one of the largest libraries in the country, and I haven't even looked around at the available resources.
Until a few days ago.
I'm overwhelmed.
When compared to libraries, Wikipedia is small. (See Digest of Education Statistics 2008, Chapter 7:Libraries and Educational Technology Libraries, and turn to page 617).
But is that a fair comparison?
Yes.
Why?
Because we have growth potential. :)
And we cover everything, including libraries!
Guess what else I found?
Hunting for outlines
I began to study libraries and librarians, since they are experts in organizing knowledge. And of course I turned to Wikipedia to see what we had on the things I came across...
And while doing so I kept running into outlines on Wikipedia that are not (yet) part of the Outline of knowledge.
When I come across non-OOK outlines, generally I rename them, and reformat them to our standard outline format. But there is the occasional exception.
Here are some outlines I just added:
- List of energy topics --> Outline of energy (it converted great)
- List of Dewey Decimal classes --> Outline of Dewey Decimal classes (no conversion)
- Library of Congress Classification --> ??? (no rename, no conversion)
The last 2 are outlines by their very nature, and so our standard outline subheadings didn't seem to fit. So I left them as is.
I renamed the first 2, but the last one is the name of the outline, that is, the topic itself is an outline, and that outline is presented as the article's content, so I left the name as is. For now. This needs more thought.
Of course, that's not all. Concerning those last 2 outlines above...
Alternate outlines of knowledge
...not only are they outlines, but they are outlines of knowledge! Well, the top few levels, at least.
Uh, so?
What happens if we linkify them? :)
That is, what happens if we linkify their classifications to Wikipedia's outlines? :) :) :)
They become alternate top ends to the OOK
Yep.
What can you find?
I challenge you to find some "hidden" outlines.
I dare you to take a look around Wikipedia for hidden outlines (that is, outlines not yet hooked into the OOK), and add your kills to WP:WPOOK#The hunt for hidden outlines.
My trophies are already there.
May the hunt begin!
The Transhumanist 20:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Did you read the talk page and all the delete and merge votes? None of the issues, such as the fact that the article is mostly just copy and pasted from elsewhere, or that it's a POV fork article with hardly any new content, which could easily be merged into the main Firearms article, were adequately countered by those who requested it be kept Theserialcomma (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- on my count it should have been merged, but do you have any proposal, as far as wikipedia policy goes, on how we should deal with the content that is taken, verbatim, from other articles? if all that content were removed, the article would be virtually empty. if all that content remains, it's just a POV fork created because on the Firearms article, an editor was told that a firearm is a weapon, not a tool, for the purpose of the lede sentence. Theserialcomma (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- i think the consensus, factoring in the content of the messages in the 'delete' votes, was to merge. i counted 4 delete votes, 4 keep votes, 1 keep/merge, and 2 merges, as far as explicit votes go. however, if you judged the content of the delete votes, 4 of 4 deletes stated this was a POV/content fork, which is typically rectified by merging the useful info and removing the superfluous fork article. so looking beyond the actual keep/delete/merge words, and judging the content of the explanations and potential ramifications of the votes, i think it appears to be that the votes swayed towards 7 merges, with good reasons, and 4 keeps with weak reasons, with one of the keeps reasons being something about "no censorship in america!" or some such (it's in an edit summary) Theserialcomma (talk) 21:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Sprout Creek
Dravecky (talk) 02:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
IRC
You left rather abruptly, but yes, I have read policy, and I just have a different interpretation than you do. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
BLP watch
You speedy-deleted Category:BLP watched articles earlier today as a C1 (empty category), but it wasn't empty until User:Synergy went through and removed all of the articles within (a few minutes previously). You might want to recreate the category and talk to Synergy, because I don't think that there was any sort of consensus at all for his actions, and C1 is not to be used on categories unless they have been empty for four days. Horologium (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't think this would be controversial in the slightest. Fine. So we wait 4 days now I suppose. Synergy 21:21, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the category is not empty any more (Sarah Palin is back in it) and I suspect that others will also be returned. If you want this category to go away, do it the correct way, through CFD, not a if-nobody's-looking-I-can-make-this-disappear stunt like what you just pulled. Oh, and Julian, I'm not going to go all Giano on you, but citing a discussion on IRC is probably not the best way to deal with a controversial issue. :) Horologium (talk) 21:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it didn't seem like a controversial issue at the time. I suppose it was more a misunderstanding than anything else. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Now that I have had an opportunity to read Synergy's talk page, it appears that I badly over-reacted here. I was not aware that the BLP watch project was stillborn, and I know that the Palin article (on my watchlist) is under ArbCom editing restrictions (from the arbitration case last year). My apologies to both of you, although some sort of notice (other than "remove") would have helped. Horologium (talk) 21:38, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it didn't seem like a controversial issue at the time. I suppose it was more a misunderstanding than anything else. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, the category is not empty any more (Sarah Palin is back in it) and I suspect that others will also be returned. If you want this category to go away, do it the correct way, through CFD, not a if-nobody's-looking-I-can-make-this-disappear stunt like what you just pulled. Oh, and Julian, I'm not going to go all Giano on you, but citing a discussion on IRC is probably not the best way to deal with a controversial issue. :) Horologium (talk) 21:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for giving rollback to my alternate account. GT5162 (我的对话页) 21:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Deletion request
Given the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information and Documenation Center on NATO in Republic of Moldova, would you also please consider deleting the duplicate page Information and Documentation Center on NATO in Republic of Moldova? Thanks. - Biruitorul Talk 22:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I'll start that up. - Biruitorul Talk 23:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Never gonna
Give you up, never gonna let you down, nice glasses btw =\ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.36.235.146 (talk) 23:52, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Robbing Peter to pay Paul
The page Robbing Peter to pay Paul was recently deleted as a result of an expired prod. I was unaware that a prod had been placed there, and had I noticed it, I would have removed it, thereby requiring it to go to afd. Besides, if it goes to afd, I support saving it, and could even improve it. Hellno2 (talk) 02:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Please participate in Flag of Singapore's peer review
Hello, Juliancolton! On IRC, you said you liked flag articles and would be happy to review Flag of Singapore. You have probably forgotten (or were too busy), and the article has only received one review in three weeks, so here is a gentle reminder to review the article! We (Zscout370, Jacklee and I) are particularly concerned about the prose and organisation. Thank you in advance! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I have a question
Is it ageist the rules to Removing-tag per Template. To clean up the backlog. because I been doing this for a week now. I did get Articles to be expanded down to 5,273 articles... It was over 6,000 articles before I started.
Is it ageist the rules to add { { talkheader } } on the talk pages of new pages that I know are not going to get deleted?
I been having problems with a user over the adding { { talkheader } } on talk pages of new page (Articles talk pages). Another Administrator told them it was aright.. But.. She or He keeps bugging me and I told that user to leave me alone. Other than that my day has been bad.--Michael (Talk) 07:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
My last edit to crank high voltage
As ridiculous as it sounds, in crank high voltage he does not kill the doctors because they were going to remove his heart. He heard them talking about removing his penis. It may not be appropriate, but the previous version was inaccurate. Please revert it back, or change it.
Summer-Like Weather in California
It's summer in April in Southern California. Right now in Ridgecrest, CA it is 90 °F at 5:00pm (PST)
... Heat advisory in effect...
A strong ridge of high pressure will continue to combine with a weak offshore flow to create record to near-record high temperatures on Monday. Locations at the coast will again soar into the 80s. For spots further inland... many places will go into the upper 90s with even a few 100s not out of the question. This second day of much above normal temperatures has the potential to create health problems especially for people who are highly sensitive to the heat.--Michael (Talk) 00:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Check this link out Here National Weather Service --Michael (Talk) 03:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Had, and is expecting the same in Lancaster :( Matthewedwards : Chat 03:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd tap that.
Pshhhhhhhh I'd tap that. *huggle* --Mixwell!Talk 02:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
DougsTech (talk) 03:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
WikiCup Newsletter XIII
The WikiCup Newsletter |
---|
Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 09:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.
Preceding unsigned comment
Thank you for your consideration. I have made an attempt to appease the editor on my talk page. Please advise if there is anything else I should do to avoid even the appearance of being disruptive. --Preceding unsigned comment 11:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Sockpuppets stacking discussions
Unfortunately, because of the issue raised at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Socking ...and_more, I've re-listed "The Above Ground Sound" of Jake Holmes at Deletion Review (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 April 20). See the listing for more details. In light of the new evidence, and what you said in the prior review you based your closure upon, please double-check your closure and report at DRV whether or not this changes things. Uncle G (talk) 11:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- You might also want to take another look at this AFD where the nominator votes !delete with one of his socks. (ironically the other "delete" is the article's creator) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)