Generally, I'll reply here if you post here, so please watch this page if you want to see my reply. If replying on another page, use the
Seeming sock puppetsHello. I know it's too late now, but I noted that three IP addresses have been used by a single person to vandalize pages related to Hello Kitty anime, Onegai My Melody, and Ni Hao, Kai-Lan as they seem to support each others' edits. The IPs in question are: 76.117.98.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), 71.58.37.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), and 69.242.55.122 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which are addresses used by the vandal who was using the now blocked 68.44.142.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). They seem like they're used by the same person to me due to the kinds of edits the former three dished out. Just discovered this after reverting edits at the Kai-lan article (first using an anonymous IP myself in my sister's laptop before logging in with my own laptop). Shall I report this to WP:AN/I? Thanks in advance. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
WP:MOS-JAI've got another proposed change to the guideline here. Your opinion on the matter, rather than me hearing Mujaki's, Jpatokal's, and Jfgslo's incorrect uses of other policies, would be helpful in determining a new consensus on the page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC) End of year awards
Wikipedia 10th Anniversary events in JapanIt's shameful that there's no 10th Anniversary event in Tokyo. Is there any way of determining and contacting the most active contributors in greater Tokyo (expats and Japanese) and seeing if there's interest in organizing something? LittleBen (talk) 15:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Apparent problem edits questionWhat does someone do re: edits that appear to be making more issues than they are solving? A user came to my attention last night/early this AM with an apparently automated "cleanup" of a page which wound up in refs backlog. I saw that the user has removed many links to non-free images due to lack of rationales. While I realize all must have a rationale, many editors who work on articles are not the original uploaders of these images, have no idea why they have disappeared and possibly not know what to do about the issue. These images then may wind up as redlink non-free in backlog and be deleted, depending on the experience level of the user who is trying to solve the problem. Would it be possible for some type of change in policy re: these images, such as placing a notice on the article's talk page stating the problem and that the image may be deleted in X number of days unless corrected? This would provide all editors of the article fair notice of the issue and afford them the opportunity to correct the matter. Thanks for listening! We hope (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
This will be my first try at policy--will list it there but might need to bother you again re: fine points on it. :-) Thanks again! We hope (talk) 17:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC) Just a note for future reference. Lists are copyright, which is why we don't copy out entire lists, but use a sample - I think 10 - 20% has been seen as acceptable, while this article copies out the entire list. The link at the bottom of the page doesn't give a source, but a site where any individual can create their own list. It's worth looking closely at what is given as a "reference" before declining a Prod as "has a reference". If you do a search on Ranker for the list you'll come upon the person who made the list a 13 year. SilkTork *YES! 12:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
your assistance requested.since you were involved with the RFC/U in 2009, concerning Docu, I've noticed he is back to not signing his signature properly. look at the edit history of User talk:Docu as he removed a notice i made requesting him to sign properly. LibStar (talk) 12:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
JpatokalJpatokal has seen it fit to revert my removal of your bit on the namidash and replacing that example with the star glyph. Do you have any issue with my changes, particularly concerning the fact that for the past year I have been trying to get some discussion as to whether or not we should allow the closest possible derivative of the namidash into article titles?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC) And now that Pmanderson has involved himself, again, I have modified the section once more.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC) And Jpatokal reverted me again, and I have tried to reword my changes to what you added so it is allowed again.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC) poke. Prodego talk 07:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Speculative fiction listed at Redirects for discussionAn editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Speculative fiction. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Speculative fiction redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Mhiji 13:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC) Since you're the 'crat who does most of the changes there, just thought I should introduce myself :p You may have seen me do a bit of clerking there, not that there's much to do - you take care of most of it (and good job there!). I do some clerking at CHUU too, there's a bit more work there. Anyway, if you see me doing anything wrong feel free to tell me and be as harsh as you want. dmz 22:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject United StatesWikipedia talk:WikiProject Science FictionFYI - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Science Fiction has posts that appear to have gone unaddressed for a while. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Martintg![]() I recently requested a username change, and now User:Martintg seems to have emailed you some kind of complaint. I'm wondering whether this is somehow related to the rename of my account? Nanobear (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I asked Nihonjoe that since Nanobear's former identity is under an active Arbcom discretionary sanction, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Digwuren#Log_of_blocks_and_bans should be updated to reflect Nanobear's new name. Is a formal report to ANI really required for something that really is a mundane procedural matter? --Martin (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Apologies if I made an error when renaming. Is that sanction still open? It seems from the wikilink above to be six months from last January. --Dweller (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee#Renaming_users_under_sanctions --Dweller (talk) 11:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC) Rules of capitalizationHi Joe. On these "corrections" of yours: WP:MOS tells us (on capitalization):
(My emphasis.) Nothing about what's not in English. One part of WP:MOSJ promises to give guidance on capitalization for Japanese, but actually the section is devoted to the reproduction of text that's already in roman script (though NUttiLY caPITalized) when in Japanese, and therefore is irrelevant here. What I don't see is any instruction that romanized versions of titles not in English should use the "up" style of capitalization in English (an instruction that would lead to indisputably bizarre results if applied to, say, German) or that glosses in English of titles in other languages should do so. As you may have guessed from the number of places that you had to "correct", I was pretty sure of what I was doing. I was sleepy, so I may have made mistakes within it; and also you are free to dislike or disagree with it, but here it is (where "up" and "down" styles -- terms that I believe are used in the Chicago Manual of Style -- mean respectively "capitalize where doing so is not bizarre" [e.g. A Dictionary of Modern History 1789–1945] and "don't capitalize where not doing so is not bizarre" [e.g. A dictionary of modern history 1789–1945]):
This or something like it is what I've done in a fairly large number of articles, adding up to a huge number of titles. (An example: Ihei Kimura.) I don't remember having read criticism of this practice. It's pretty much what's done in "my" (!) "Good Article" Hiroh Kikai, and it was not an issue in either promotion to or reassessment of GA status. Your preference isn't clearly wrong, but I believe that my system is better, because:
In the spirit of "WP:RETAIN" (which is admittedly about US/British spelling and not capitalization), I suggest that the article should stay as it was, and that you should therefore revert your (well-intentioned) edit. -- Hoary (talk) 05:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC) |