Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:51, 30 March 2008

Redvers is male • gay • married • a socialist • a vegetarian • Welsh • an atheist • and tell us all how things are so much better 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Don't post your images to Commons. Why not? DON'T post "talkback" templates. I'm already watchlisting your talk page Watchlist this page to see replies

Diff Deletion

Per this diff. I'm not sure if it works here (it should), but there is some user js I found at the Wikimania wiki that allows you to modify Special:Undelete to have a Select All and Invert All button added next to Restore and Reset. And all boxes should be checked by default, allowing deleting diffs like the aforementioned a lot easier. You might give it a lookover. I can't seem to find it again at Wikimania but you should be able to pull it from my personal js here for use in yours if you so desire. --Charitwo 12:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I'll take a look. The main issue here was actually not the ticking and unticking. I'm naturally nervous of having to delete a page with more than a thousand or so revisions in order to remove one of them - the servers can take a huge hit. Oversight has the benefit here of removing one without temporarily remove lots. ➨ REDVEЯS is a satellite and will be set alight 12:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Easterlily.jpg

I replaced the existing image with a self-made image and uploaded it as a public domain image, but the existing licience wasn't updated and I dont know how to fix that can you help. I also uploaded the new image to commons with the right licence. Thanks.--Padraig (talk) 14:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you've now sorted it. Since you've also uploaded it to Commons with the same information, I'll delete this version for you. ➨ REDVEЯS is a satellite and will be set alight 15:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

2008 unrest in Tibet

If possible for you, could you please add these important informations to the article that you have protected? There seems to be lots of confusion going on, and therefore these citations are aiming at clarification. I would suggest to add this at the end of paragraph "2008_unrest_in_Tibet#Violence_in_Lhasa" Thanks --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 20:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

According to GCHQ, the UK government communications agency, agents of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, disguised as monks, triggered the riots. It is therefore speculated that the riots were deliberately calculated Beijing.

According to Ruan Ming, the CCP staged the incidents in Tibet to force the Dalai Lama to resign and to justify repression of the Tibetans. He declare : « The demonstration on March 10 was meant to be peaceful. You can see from the pictures that the demonstration was all monks. The CCP arrested some of these monks and killed them. The killing angered some young Tibetans. By March 14, the Tibetans could no longer stand the killing of innocent monks and protested ». Ruan thinks the events in Tibet are aiming to influence world opinion. « The Dalai Lama has always proposed a peaceful solution to Tibet issues and has won the world's recognition. With all that in mind, the CCP has framed the Dalai Lama for having 'carefully planned and stirred up the event.' This is exactly like how the CCP framed Zhao Ziyang for the Tiananmen Massacre in 1989 and accused Zhao of 'splitting the Party and supporting unrest.' The Dalai Lama had already said he would resign if the unrest continued. The Dalai Lama is influential globally and if he really retired, the CCP could gradually push and label the Tibetans as terrorists like the Xinjiang independence movement. This will give the CCP an excuse to ignore Tibetans appeals and to further repress them ».

No. Discuss changes on the talk page, come to a consensus, use the {{editprotected}} template to attract attention. Do not attempt to short-circuit this process in the midst of people edit-warring over an article: that's why it is edit-protected in the first place. ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 21:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. The edit war was between myself and Sevellade but we had already resolved it. I'm fine with the article being locked for a couple days, but it seems unfair to lock everyone else out. Our discussion resolving it early this afternoon was here User talk:Longchenpa under "Yahoo article," and the post-mortem is in the "protection" section of Talk:2008_unrest_in_Tibet. Longchenpa (talk) 21:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Please note that problems appear to have ceased, (indeed, judging by this diff, were already solved at the time of protection, though one would not have known that. Since it's a current event, rapid unprotection would be good. Relata refero (talk) 06:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected as soon as I came online this morning. ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 08:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Longchenpa (talk) 15:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. While on the subject of the Wonderful Things Admins Have Access To, I notice you already have a unified login notice up. :) Relata refero (talk) 10:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, isn't that cool! Eight projects had to be synchronised, guessing the passwords I'd used for each. But it works! Nice now to have just one login if ever I chose to go vandalising the an Inuit Misplaced Pages or something ;o) ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 12:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Inuit? Now would you mean the Inupiak one, or possibly the the Kalaallisut one? You couldn't mean the the Inaktituk one, because those guys are really, really good with vandal reversion.... Relata refero (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Three? Well, who knew?! ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 12:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely not me - not until I read Eskimo-Aleut languages, which effort I can date to the ten minutes preceding 12:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC). Relata refero (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Editabuselinks

About this: none taken :) I'm glad you approved everything else, at least! Regards, Anthøny 16:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The new template seems fab, and useful for our editors. Really good job! But, well, the borders were awful ;o) ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 19:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

DWhiskaZ‎ block

Thanks. What a waste of time! Abecedare (talk) 19:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I've seen some nests (drawers?) of socks before, but this was possibly the largest. Now gone, and I actually enjoyed wasting the 10 minutes it cost ;o) ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 20:09, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Then you'll enjoy blocking User:Contributerbylaw too! lol on "drawer of socks". Abecedare (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Got the little f..f.. fiend. ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 20:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

May I bring your attention to Misplaced Pages:Suspected_sock_puppets/Mahmoud123. I noticed you tagged User:Mahmoud123 as a confirmed sock of DWhiskaZ. --Be happy!! (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

In theory, these are all now tagged together sensibly, with the exception of one I wasn't sure of (that didn't come up on the CU either, so the seed of doubt is sown). And there's consensus in the making that DWhiskaZ, and thus his socks, is now banned for Misplaced Pages and can thus be reverted on sight. ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 20:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The edit that Mahmoud123 originally made to Muhammad article was based on a misunderstanding of sources, unawareness of the structure of the article & a unique and creative (but false) WP:OR synthesis. That's to me a fingerprint. All other users listed there were created with the single purpose of defending that edit and went right away to Muhammad article and defended him. To me, it is either him or an obedient meatpuppet of him (he might have called someone). It is however much more probable that he has simply used another network connection. By the way, User:Mohun might be him as well. Please see Talk:Muhammad#Mahmoud123.27s_edit_.28Again.29 --Be happy!! (talk) 21:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, okay. And the user is now blocked, bagged and tagged. All done. The only exception is Police99 (talk · contribs) - didn't come up on the CheckUser, slightly different modus operandii to the others (only slightly, but enough to raise doubts). I believe that Police99 == Mahmoud123 == DWhiskaZ. But I need slightly more to go on than your and my beliefs. If/when they reappear from this account and make a DWhiskaZ-style edit, we'll bag and tag. But not until. ➨ REDVEЯS paints a vulgar picture 21:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Image uploads

I saw you uploaded some free images from the Library of Congress and/or Flickr. Could you please upload these free images to Commons in the future? It will save more work in the end. Thanks. MECU≈talk 16:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

1. "'Beijing orchestrating Tibet riots'". Canada Free Press. 21 March 2008. Retrieved 2008-03-21. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
2. "Former Advisor to Party General Secretary Claims Regime Staged Lhasa Incident". The Epoch Times. 26 March 2008. Retrieved 2008-03-26. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)