Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:32, 8 July 2011

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a note by starting a new subject here and please don't forget to sign your post You may want to have a look at the subjects in the header of this talkpage before starting a new subject. The question you may have may already have been answered there Dirk Beetstra

Misplaced Pages ads file info – show another – #142

I am the main operator of User:COIBot. If you feel that your name is wrongly on the COI reports list because of an unfortunate overlap between your username and a certain link or text, please ask for whitelisting by starting a new subject on my talkpage. For a better answer please include some specific 'diffs' of your edits (you can copy the link from the report page). If you want a quicker response, make your case at WT:WPSPAM or WP:COIN. COIBot - Talk to COIBot - listings - Link reports - User reports - Page reports

Responding I will respond to talk messages where they started, trying to keep discussions in one place (you may want to watch this page for some time after adding a question). Otherwise I will clearly state where the discussion will be moved/copied to. Though, with the large number of pages I am watching, it may be wise to contact me here as well if you need a swift response. If I forget to answer, poke me. I preserve the right not to answer to non-civil remarks, or subjects which are covered in this talk-header. ON EXTERNAL LINK REMOVAL There are several discussions about my link removal here, and in my archives. If you want to contact me about my view of this policy, please read and understand WP:NOT, WP:EL, WP:SPAM and WP:A, and read the discussions on my talkpage or in my archives first. My view in a nutshell: External links are not meant to tunnel people away from the wikipedia. Hence, I will remove external links on pages where I think they do not add to the page (per WP:NOT#REPOSITORY and WP:EL), or when they are added in a way that wikipedia defines as spam (understand that wikipedia defines spam as: '... wide-scale external link spamming ...', even if the link is appropriate; also read this). This may mean that I remove links, while similar links are already there or which are there already for a long time. Still, the question is not whether your link should be there, the question may be whether those other links should be there (again, see the wording of the policies and guidelines). Please consider the alternatives before re-adding the link: If the link contains information, use the information to add content to the article, and use the link as a reference (content is not 'see here for more information'). Add an appropriate linkfarm (you can consider to remove other links covered there). Incorporate the information into one of the sister projects. Add the link to other mediawiki projects aimed at advertiseing (see e.g. this) If the linkspam of a certain link perseveres, I will not hesitate to report it to the wikiproject spam for blacklisting (even if the link would be appropriate for wikipedia). It may be wise to consider the alternatives before things get to that point. The answer in a nutshell Please consider if the link you want to add complies with the policies and guidelines. If you have other questions, or still have questions on my view of the external link policy, disagree with me, or think I made a mistake in removing a link you added, please poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page. If you absolutely want an answer, you can try to poke the people at WT:EL or WT:WPSPAM on your specific case. Also, regarding link, I can be contacted on IRC, channel . Reliable sources I convert inline URL's into references and convert referencing styles to a consistent format. My preferred style is the style provided by cite.php (<ref> and <references/>). When other mechanisms are mainly (but not consistently) used (e.g. {{ref}}/{{note}}/{{cite}}-templates) I will assess whether referencing would benefit from the cite.php-style. Feel free to revert these edits when I am wrong. Converting inline URLs in references may result in data being retrieved from unreliable sources. In these cases, the link may have been removed, and replaced by a {{cn}}. If you feel that the page should be used as a reference (complying with wp:rs!!), please discuss that on the talkpage of the page, or poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page Note: I am working with some other developers on mediawiki to expand the possibilities of cite.php, our attempts can be followed here and here. If you like these features and want them enabled, please vote for these bugs. Stub/Importance/Notability/Expand/Expert I am in general against deletion, except when the page really gives misinformation, is clear spam or copyvio. Otherwise, these pages may need to be expanded or rewritten. For very short articles there are the different {{stub}} marks, which clearly state that the article is to be expanded. For articles that do not state why they are notable, I will add either {{importance}} or {{notability}}. In my view there is a distinct difference between these two templates, while articles carrying one of these templates may not be notable, the first template does say the article is probably notable enough, but the contents does not state that (yet). The latter provides a clear concern that the article is not notable, and should probably be {{prod}}ed or {{AfD}}ed. Removing importance-tags does not take away the backlog, it only hides from attention, deleting pages does not make the database smaller. If you contest the notability/importance of an article, please consider adding an {{expert-subject}} tag, or raise the subject on an appropriate wikiproject. Remember, there are many, many pages on the wikipedia, many need attention, so maybe we have to live with a backlog. Having said this, I generally delete the {{expand}}-template on sight. The template is in most cases superfluous, expansion is intrinsic to the wikipedia (for stubs, expansion is already mentioned in that template).

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof. Warning to Spammers: This user is armed with Spamda This user knows where IRC hides the cookies, and knows how to feed them to AntiSpamBot. Archives This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Timestamped threads older than 7 days are automatically archived to the current archive Talk started 20/3/2006 1 - 7/9/2006 2 - 29/11/2006 3 - 05/02/2007 4 - 05/03/2007 5 - 15/03/2007 6 - 29/07/2007 7 - 06/11/2007 8 - 31/03/2008 9 - 22/09/2008 10 - 03/02/2009 11 - 17/05/2009 12 - 13/11/2009 13 - 27/5/2010 14 - 13/12/2010 15 - 5/7/2011 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - current 23 - 24 - 25 -

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Email

(sig to archive) --Dirk Beetstra 13:22, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding image on FC Seoul page

My English is poor. So I can't accept your direction. I hope that you do it instead of me. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by footwiks (talk • contribs)

I am sorry, we'll have to wait for someone who knows the subject. --Dirk Beetstra 19:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Pdfpdf

I've made a comment at User talk:Pdfpdf#Your block that you should be aware of. Thanks!  -- Lear's Fool 14:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I'll keep an eye. Note, the block is also discussed off-wiki on the unblock mailinglist (though the discussion is silent for some time already). --Dirk Beetstra 19:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

He has indicated to me by e-mail that he would like to make an unblock request under the conditions I've offered. Unless there's anything from the mailinglist discussion you think I should know, I'll probably remove the talkpage restriction in the next 24 hours.  -- Lear's Fool 03:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I have allowed talkpage access again for the user. I do note, that I found this necessary since I found (at the time of block) that there are over the last two months at least two cases of non-free image misuse while the editor was very active in that field. The continuous questions of others on my talkpage regarding the indef block made me dig deeper, and this issue with non-free image misuse and running into Delta is older than this (several cases). I stand by the point, that the editor by now should know better and try to follow NFC, and I hope that that message will get through. There is no excuse for further misuse of non-free material, nor to continuously personally attack editors. --Dirk Beetstra 07:15, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Lisinopril and CheMoBot

Hi. I would appreciate if you would please check out the Lisinopril history. This article contains a live example of a transcluded drugbox template. I realize that currently there is no consensus to use transcluded tempates, but I wanted to keep this one intact as a live example of how the transclusion would work. I tried shutting down the edit priviliges for the article by adding the {{nobots}} template to the article, but that did not seem to work. Your thoughts? Boghog (talk) 20:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

You have to update the index for the box, see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Pharmacology/Index and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chemicals/Index. --Dirk Beetstra 19:39, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, now I understand. Both the parent article and special purpose template were included in the index. So I went ahead and removed the parent article from the index in this edit. Thanks for the information. Boghog (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

NFCCheckBot

Is the code for user:NFCCheckBot available somewhere? I'd like to help. John Vandenberg 01:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

No, not yet. Still heavy under development. If you're on IRC, it is in #NFCCCompliance, I'll be there during the day as well. I'll consider publishing the code at some point. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra 19:36, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm mostly looking for the "fair use image used without applicable FUR" identification logic. I'm hanging around in that channel now. John Vandenberg 23:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Eh .. I am not sure if the word 'applicable' is correct here. The scripts are not detecting whether a rationale could possibly be created. But I am on my way to the channel. --Dirk Beetstra 07:03, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Homatropine/Methylhomatropine

This entry has previously mixed and merged two completely different medications, Homatropine, an analog of Atropine and Methylhomatropine, the corresponding quaternary ammonium ion/salt. The latter one does not cross the blood/brain barrier, acts only peripherally and has different indications, compare to Scopolamine vs. Butylscopolamine (Buscopan), that is the same constellation. I have separated this into two entries, could you please take a look, that the chemboxes/drugboxes are now ok, I am not sure if my copy paste edit got everything right. Also a new picture is needed for Homatropine. See discussions there. 70.137.149.219 (talk) 07:06, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

All looks basically fine. I'll see if I can script-verify the data in the pages. Thanks for the work!! --Dirk Beetstra 07:39, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

There is a bug that happened in the update, it reverted the uii of homatropine to homatropine methylbromide, which is the wrong drug, and which was previously in this entry. can you take a look? I think it has to be reverted, the bot seems to insist it is the old chemical namely methylhomatropine, the quaternary compound. 70.137.136.46 (talk) 10:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Oops .. my script uses an old list of that, I have updated my list. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra 10:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Bummer!. There is a bug in the bot update, it got it wrong again and reverted to the methylhomatropine. The manual value was correct. 70.137.136.46 (talk) 10:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Sigh .. I see. I am trying again - this was deeper, problem with the original source of the UNII's .. pff. I'll keep an eye! Thanks again! --Dirk Beetstra 10:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Image placement in Chembox

A glitch ? Materialscientist (talk) 01:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

No. The box has first 2 images 'normal' (image 1 and 2), then 2 rows of 2 side-by-side (L1/R1 and L2/R2), then again 2 'normal' (3 and 4) and then again 2 rows of 2 side-by-side (L3/R3 and L4/R4) .. I thought always that you could make all combinations that would normally be used then. I think here they want to fill L1/R1 and L2/R2, and then Image3 .. that should give the right combination. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra 07:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

But isn't that what they have done? The chembox currently uses L1/R1, L2/R2, and Image3 but it displays in the order L1/R1, Image3, L2/R2. (Sorry to butt in on this conversation...) ChemNerd (talk) 11:29, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Forgot to answer this point. I was mistaken about the chembox. I have adapted the code, so that this can be displayed as wanted. --Dirk Beetstra 14:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! ChemNerd (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

FC Seoul image

If you know how to solve it, do it by yourself. Why you just speak in a commanding tone? I don't understand your action.— Preceding unsigned comment added by footwiks (talk • contribs)

No, I don't know how to solve it. I don't know the rationale of using it, I only know how to technically write the rationale in this case. You want to include the image, it is up to you to write the rationale. --Dirk Beetstra 08:03, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

re:non-free media in userspace

Thanks for that -I was kind of hoping noone would notice for a few hours :P The article will be going live within the hour Brian | (Talk) 10:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmm .. Brian .. I am afraid that that is part of the problem with NFCC enforcement .. --Dirk Beetstra 11:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

re:non-free media overuse

Then surely that article itself shouldn't exist? That one image I left on there was a logo. If you think it doesn't identify the organisation, then the entire page should probably just be merged with ITV1. Digifiend (talk) 11:57, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

No. There may be images which can be used, it may even be that it is one of the images that is there, but the one you chose is certainly not the one to 'identify' Night Network - there surely must be a logo that everyone would recognise as the logo, I hope that it is not the 'back soon' image, because if that would be the case, then most people would watch thát screen, and not any programs. --Dirk Beetstra 11:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Read Misplaced Pages:Five pillars

Misplaced Pages does not have firm rules. Rules in Misplaced Pages are not carved in stone, and their wording and interpretation are likely to change over time. The principles and spirit of Misplaced Pages's rules matter more than their literal wording, and sometimes improving Misplaced Pages requires making an exception to a rule. Be bold (but not reckless) in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be perfect; prior versions are saved, so no damage is irreparable. Northamerica1000 (talk) 12:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

True, but these links fail our WP:EL guideline, and WP:NOT. If you beg to differ, please discuss on the talkpage. --Dirk Beetstra 12:57, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Read Misplaced Pages:Avoid instruction creep

Instruction creep occurs when Misplaced Pages guideline or policy pages contain statements that expound upon unimportant details and minutiae, often in ways that exaggerate the situation or severely limit options and thus don't reflect true community consensus. To avoid errors and maximize usefulness, policies and guidelines should be as brief and simple as reasonably possible.

There are two major causes of instruction creep:

1. Editors sometimes produce too much instruction and thus over-complicate the page. Lengthy and complex advice pages are ignored as being too long to read.
2. Editors don't believe that nobody reads the directions. They believe that putting advice into a guideline or policy results in most of the English Misplaced Pages's thousands of active editors following the directions. In reality, Misplaced Pages has more than 50 full policies and more than 500 guidelines, and hardly anybody reads all of them.

Northamerica1000 (talk) 12:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

So, you don't have to read all of them, but when you are repeatedly pointed to one or two, I do suggest that you read those. The external links you add fail WP:EL and WP:NOT. --Dirk Beetstra 13:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Rather than edit warring

like you did at Twist and Shout (EP), would it be possible for you to simply explain how a particular image fails NFCC? Radiopathy •talk• 14:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, "All non-free files used on this page must have a valid and specific rationale for use on this page"/"one or more files removed due to missing rationale" - do I have to write it out differently? There were non-free files used on the page which did not have a valid and specific rationale for the use on the page. Both you and I, obviously, did not spot the mistake, but clearly there was not a rationale for the page where it was displayed on. I see you repaired it by now. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra 14:53, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

If you're unable to 'spot the mistake' as you say, why are you removing the images? And further, why not just fix it yourself? Radiopathy •talk• 14:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Radiopathy, was there anywhere on the image description page mentioned that the image was deemed fair-use on Twist and Shout (EP)? There was a fair-use rationale for Twist and Shout, but that is a different article. So, is there a valid and specific rationale for the use on this page? No, there is not. So there was a mistake, that was clear. What the mistake was, whether it was broken, or plainly missing, I did not know. I just saw that the rationale was not there.

I am at no obligation to solve the problem, I will if I see what the problem is (e.g. diff) .. here I did not see it. --Dirk Beetstra 15:10, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at List of Rozen Maiden characters, you may be blocked from editing. Fleet Command (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow, a uw-vandalism3 ?? --Dirk Beetstra 15:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at List of Rozen Maiden characters, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Fleet Command (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of Rozen Maiden characters. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Island Monkey 15:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)