Revision as of 03:47, 12 October 2007 view sourceDaniel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators75,754 editsm Reverted edits by Daniel (talk) to last version by Raul654← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:28, 12 October 2007 view source 204.52.215.107 (talk) →New York City MeetupNext edit → | ||
Line 240: | Line 240: | ||
|} | |} | ||
The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a ] local chapter. Hope to see you there!--] 20:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a ] local chapter. Hope to see you there!--] 20:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
==Alternative histories, eh?== | |||
Pretty cool. What kinds do you like? ] 04:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:28, 12 October 2007
- Archive 1: August 2003 - November 2003
- Archive 2: December 2003 - March 2004
- Archive 3: April 2004 - July 2004
- Archive 4: August 2004 - November 2004
- Archive 5: December 2004 - March 2005
- Archive 6: April 2005 - July 2005
- Archive 7: August 2005 - November 2005
- Archive 8: December 2005 - March 2006
- Archive 9: April 2006 - July 2006
- Archive 10: August 2006 - November 2006
- Archive 11: December 2006 - February 2007
- Archive 12: March 2007 - May 2007
- Archive 13: June 2007 - August 2007
- Archive 14: September 2007 - December 2007
Melodifestivalen
Could you close the FAC nomination please? After I started the nom, the League of Copyeditors began copyediting it, and because of that now's probably not the best time for it to be there. Thanks. Chwech 20:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Main page image for intelligent design
Any ideas what will work for a main page image on October 12? Would either the photo of William Dembski or Richard Dawkins be adequate for that in your judgment? ... Kenosis 23:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- I considered those, but neither of them are related closely enough to ID to merit a mention in the main page blurb. Having a picture of either of them would simply confuse readers.
- I hit on this very point at the end of July when I posted on the talk page asking for image suggestions, and nobody came up with one. If ID had a logo (or the DI itself) that we could use, I'd be all for it, but for now, I don't see any images that should go in the main page blurb. Raul654 05:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Ernest Emerson
I believe that you are responsible for selecting this article as an FA. I put up the original AfD on this crude puff piece but it was removed. Where does it say in any policy that an article featured on the main page cannot be the subject of an AfD? Albatross2147 08:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Your not the first person who has tried AFDing today's featured article. No such nomination has ever been successful (In fact, now that I think about it, nobody has ever successfully nominated any featured article for deletion, Nude celebrities on the Internet not withstanding) I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but you're wrong, and if you proceed with it, your AFD nomination will not be successful. Chances if someone sees the daily featured article and thinks it should be deleted, he's almost certainly wrong. Put simply, deletion-worthy articles don't get that far.
- So, to answer your question, we don't allow AFD nominations on the daily featured article because to do so would be to invite havoc. It makes Misplaced Pages look bad to have AFD tags on the featured article, and most of the time they are put there because of vandalism or breaching experiments. I don't know if that's written down anywhere, but that's just the way it is. Raul654 05:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Albatross is still asking the admin who closed Ernest Emerson to overturn and reinstate the AFD, and it is still being tagged as an advert. Good old mainpage. I tried to clean up that horrid South Park article, but it's one of those articles that doesn't attract stable editing/editors. Shows like that remind me of why I don't watch TV, even when it's not competing with the playoffs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ernest Emerson. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- AFD was closed and FAR was opened. Raul654 17:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- This place is exhausting. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- AFD was closed and FAR was opened. Raul654 17:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ernest Emerson. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi — I'm puzzled by your edit linked above; according to its history, this middot template is almost a year old, its use appears to be established in numerous places and the rationale for it on its page seems sensible. Please enlighten. Thanks, Sardanaphalus 11:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Two reasons - Primarily because I don't really see how it's any different than that we currently have, but more importantly because it makes the page more complicated and harder to maintain. The vast majority of changes to the text (by character length) are me updating it to add new articles, and so any changes like this impact on me particularly. Raul654 05:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, okay. I was prompted to make the change as the line wrapping looked a little odd and I'd seen this template that appeared to be a tailor-made solution. Sorry to've perturbed your system. Sardanaphalus 09:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
PMA and WIAFA
He's just added the dispute tag to the criteria. Sigh. It's an on-going campaign to take a shot at the MoS whenever possible. Marskell 13:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Legal threats?
Hi Raul (and possibly any other admins watching :-). Re "alex" the t:GW anon, could you take a look at his talk page for a possible legal-threats problem. Though I'm never sure how seriously these should be taken William M. Connolley 20:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that those are legal threats, but JoshuaZ already took care of it. Raul654 05:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I missed that William M. Connolley 15:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Check out my monobook!
Take a look at my monobook.js! I've been compiling from different users and scripts I've found. You can take a look at User:Yamakiri on Firefox/monobook.js or add importscript('User:Yamakiri on Firefox/monobook.js'); though, most people choose not to paste an import of another user's monobook for security reasons (JavaScript cookies). YДмΔќʃʀïC← 10-2-2007 • 22:47:40 22:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't know you could include another users's monobook settings like that.
- But it's neither here nor there, because I don't use monobook. I prefer classic skin (one of the last...). But at least I convinced Brion make sure that oversight works in non-monobook skins :) Raul654 05:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
trying to reach out...
Hi Mark,
I've been trying to reach you via your email address @comcast.com but its been failing.
Is there a way I can reach you and respond to your email to me re: Musopen.com
-Aaron —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magic5227 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- That's odd. Is it going through or bouncing? I checked my spam filter on the off chance it's the former, but I didn't see any legit emails (My spam filter is very good - I've never had a false positive in 4 years).
- Regardless, I check this page very often - many times per day. So you can communicate (nonprivately) with me here. Otherwise, you can try my University email address: markpell at udel.edu
- I prefer to keep Misplaced Pages stuff off of that account, but this is an exceptional case. Raul654 01:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Philly meetup #5
Please look at Misplaced Pages:Meetup/Philadelphia 5 and give your input about the next meet-up. Thank you.
This automated notice was delivered to you because you are on the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Philadelphia/Philadelphia meet-up invite list. BrownBot 21:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
April Fool's day 2008
I know that it's six months away, but could you possibly put Toledo War on hold for that day. Frankly, I think that would be a good article for April Fool's Day, not believing it myself. The Placebo Effect 22:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Block of 207.250.84.10
I've reversed your block of the above IP. You may wish to review our blocking policy, as there was nothing appropriate about this block. No warnings, no communication, no POV pushing (your reason for the block), and certainly nothing remotely warranting a block. If you disagree with somebody's edit, discuss it. Do not revert them and block them; this was not vandalism. - auburnpilot talk 22:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Apparently you didn't look at his edits all that hard.
- His edits calling an Inconvenient Truth controversial have been reverted many times from that article. His edits to The 11th Hour (a movie about the generally bad shape of the environment) make his POV pushing even more clear - he adds a criticism section sourced exclusively to a well known contrarian (falsely labelling him one of Greenpeace's cofounders) , and then deletes criticisms of that contrarian.
- I am going to be keeping an eye on him, and if I see any more edits of this sort, I will be reblocking him. In the future, you should do a modicum of investigating before reversing another admin's block. Raul654 00:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- I actually did review his edits before reversing the block, and the fact remains, you didn't even attempt to explain to him the problem. We have standard warnings for a reason, but when they don't apply, you are still expected to warn a user if they are violating policy. Blocking somebody without an explanation serves no purpose other than punishment; if they don't know what they did wrong, they'll continue after the block. This is especially true of disputes related to content and neutral point of view issues. - auburnpilot talk 01:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- This is a great example of[REDACTED] bias. Raul, you of all people shouldn't be blocking someone because of POV pushing. Pot, this is Kettle. Your Black. Also, as far as the "co-founder" thing, you would think that if Greenpeace listed Moore as a Co-Founder... we would hate to disagree with the accuracy of Greanpeace, now wouldn't we? But then again, its pretty typical to shut up the decenting view in the Global Warming articles, isn't it?--68.115.80.156 23:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- The Greenpeace International web site used to include Moore in their list of founders. However, there is some controversy over whether Moore was a co-founder, or merely an early member, of Greenpeace. His claim of being a founding member is supported by Paul Watson but disputed by other founders including Dorothy Stowe, Bob Hunter (deceased), Ben Metcalf (deceased), Dorothy Metcalf, and Jim and Marie Bolen, and is at odds with his original Greenpeace membership application. - Patrick Moore (environmentalist) Raul654 00:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Patrick Moore's history as a co-founder of Greenpeace includes his attendance at the planning sessions for the first voyage against US nuclear testing in 1971, sailing as a member of the crew on the first voyage, and serving 15 years in the top committee of Greenpeace, the last seven years as one of five directors of Greenpeace International. - You forgot this part, from the same wiki article. Are you stating then that what was on Greanpeace's website about Their own founders was incorrect? such a thing can be considered rather... controversial.--207.250.84.10 20:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- The Greenpeace International web site used to include Moore in their list of founders. However, there is some controversy over whether Moore was a co-founder, or merely an early member, of Greenpeace. His claim of being a founding member is supported by Paul Watson but disputed by other founders including Dorothy Stowe, Bob Hunter (deceased), Ben Metcalf (deceased), Dorothy Metcalf, and Jim and Marie Bolen, and is at odds with his original Greenpeace membership application. - Patrick Moore (environmentalist) Raul654 00:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- This is a great example of[REDACTED] bias. Raul, you of all people shouldn't be blocking someone because of POV pushing. Pot, this is Kettle. Your Black. Also, as far as the "co-founder" thing, you would think that if Greenpeace listed Moore as a Co-Founder... we would hate to disagree with the accuracy of Greanpeace, now wouldn't we? But then again, its pretty typical to shut up the decenting view in the Global Warming articles, isn't it?--68.115.80.156 23:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- I actually did review his edits before reversing the block, and the fact remains, you didn't even attempt to explain to him the problem. We have standard warnings for a reason, but when they don't apply, you are still expected to warn a user if they are violating policy. Blocking somebody without an explanation serves no purpose other than punishment; if they don't know what they did wrong, they'll continue after the block. This is especially true of disputes related to content and neutral point of view issues. - auburnpilot talk 01:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
5-article limit
What's with the 5-article limit on Misplaced Pages:Today's_featured_article/requests? It'd make more sense to limit it to 30-days (2-weeks, whatever)in the future. Here's the problem. Right now there are 5 articles listed going to Nov 2nd, but UserDarthgriz98 wants to list one for Oct 31 (not halloween related), but technically she can't. Carried out, people could list things for next year and block listings for the immediate future.Rlevse 16:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- It is limited both ways - requests must be for a date in the next 30 days. And because I don't want the page to balloon back up to 200 requests, I've limited it to 5. The big, bolded text at he top of the page - Date requests must be for dates within the next thirty days that have not yet been scheduled. There may be no more than five requests on this page at any time - makes this clear. So no, people cannot list things for next year (until December rolls around). Raul654 16:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- So if there are legit requests for the current 30 days, all at the end of the period, they can't submit one? That's simply not right.Rlevse 16:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- The alternative (that there is no limit) means the requests page will balloon back up to 200 requests, and that's simply not acceptable. The system's not perfect, but it meets everyone's needs. If someone has to wait until a request gets fulfilled or removed to make another one, I consider that an acceptable trade-off. Raul654 16:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- So if there are legit requests for the current 30 days, all at the end of the period, they can't submit one? That's simply not right.Rlevse 16:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mayr.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Mayr.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Calliopejen1 18:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Weak oppose and support
As I'm sure you know some users will sometimes express "Weak oppose" and "Weak support" for FA nominations. When come to promoting and failing nomination do you actually treat these any diffrently from normal oppose and support? Buc 19:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I tend to give them less weight in my decision to promote/archive/restart/leave it up. Raul654 21:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Check?
Raul, I can't get past the instructions at the checkuser page; are you able to look at this one? AnnieTigerChucky (talk · contribs) has been blocked several times for copyright violations (not to mention general disruption) on all of the Wolff family articles (Michael Wolff, Alex Wolff, Nat Wolff, Polly Draper, The Tic Code, The Naked Brothers Band, etc.) Annie hasn't returned since her last block. NakedBros1 (talk · contribs) is making the same sorts of copyvios (uploading images and copying entire media articles into Wiki) on the same series of articles. (Wish I could get away from these juvenile tic-related articles.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, they match. Raul654 00:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thought so; what do I do next? Should I go back to the original blocking admin? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- user:Sarah took care of it . Speaking of which, did you watch South Park last night? I saw you edited the article. Raul654 00:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, I don't watch that kind of TV, especially not with the baseball playoffs on, but I did try to keep the article in shape (not easy). Thanks for the tip; I was able to add in the TSA press releases. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Aww, you missed a good one :( - and, IMO, it wasn't all that offensive to people with Tourette's. Personally, I *CAN'T WAIT* for Drawn Together in an hour or so :) Raul654 00:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- I don't trust the TSA much, but according to their press release, they agreed it wasn't so bad. It didn't raise a fuss at all in the TS community, so either it wasn't bad, or we're so used to it, it's just another coprolalia cheap trick :-) I don't watch TV, *you* missed some great baseball :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Aww, you missed a good one :( - and, IMO, it wasn't all that offensive to people with Tourette's. Personally, I *CAN'T WAIT* for Drawn Together in an hour or so :) Raul654 00:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, I don't watch that kind of TV, especially not with the baseball playoffs on, but I did try to keep the article in shape (not easy). Thanks for the tip; I was able to add in the TSA press releases. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- user:Sarah took care of it . Speaking of which, did you watch South Park last night? I saw you edited the article. Raul654 00:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thought so; what do I do next? Should I go back to the original blocking admin? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Blurb tweak
Thanks for tweaking the blurb. Sorry to request it in the wrong place; if there are instructions about where to do so, I missed them. And above all, thank you for choosing to run Orion (mythology).
Did someone suggest it? I was not planning to request it run until May 11 next; that being Ovid's date for discussing Orion. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:26, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- No, nobody suggested it. Raul654 02:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Flag approved bots
Hi Raul, since I noticed that you appear to be online right now, would you mind helping me by working through the Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Approved list and flagging the approved bots? There's a backlog of 4 now and I'd like to get started with using my recently approved one while it's still the weekend. Thanks, --CapitalR 19:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Sweet page
Hello Raul, just happened to stumble upon this! Some top quality stuff there! I'll enjoy reading more of your Misplaced Pages policies, if you have time to write them. *wink* Phgao 08:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Main page suggestion
Chess has appeared on the main page, but not for 3.5 years. It has a nice international appeal. Just a thought. --Dweller 08:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Grawp has resurfaced on another wiki
Hi there, I am in a quandary. There have been changes made to two articles on the Arpetan[REDACTED] by a user whose edit summaries suggest it is the same person as User:Grawp. The problem is I don't know how to alert any admins on the Arpetan[REDACTED] so I thought I would ask you because you banned Grawp. The links are here. Thanks Green Giant 10:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Arpetan has two administrators - Akarige and ChrisPtDe. Their talk pages are here and here. If it's Grawp, you'll probably need a checkuser on Arpetan. I doubt that Arpetan has an arbcom and/or that it has any checkusers, so they'll need a steward. Raul654 17:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- PS - I've dropped a message on those pages. Raul654 18:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. :) Green Giant 19:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Night of the Long Knives
Hello. The article Night of the Long Knives will be tomorrow's featured article, and due to its "hot-button" topic matter (Nazism), I think that it should be semi-protected for the next day or so. I and others put a lot of work into to making it comprehensive and neutral, and I see it's been anonymously vandalized in the last few days a couple times. I was thinking it should probably go into semi-protected mode before it hits the main page tomorrow. Thanks.--Mcattell 18:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Consensus v. Compromise
I reverted the edit which contained 'buttocks' as opposed to the last version. I implied that his compromise of buttocks was not the same as reaching consensus so I reverted it - but made NO changes. You seem to have used your edit summary as an attempt to not only revert my edit, but to place "ass" back into the article. Your edit summary is not consistent with the rollback I made. Try not to use my simple reversion for any particular agenda as your edit summary is misleading and clearly an excuse to re-insert a term which you find to be more correct. I simply reverted 'buttocks,' and that was the extent of it. the_undertow 19:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- I see - I think I misread your diff. Apologies - I've put it back to your compromise version. Raul654 19:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Note that this is the "arse" version, the compromise version is this. I'm not sure you intentionally reverted to the "arse" version? Melsaran (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Dammit, it's just not my day. I'll give it another try. Raul654 19:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I got it right this time -- back to the compromise version. I thought it was undertow who did it, but I was wrong - obviously I misread the diffs. Raul654 19:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Dammit, it's just not my day. I'll give it another try. Raul654 19:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Note that this is the "arse" version, the compromise version is this. I'm not sure you intentionally reverted to the "arse" version? Melsaran (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
(ec)::I appreciate that. I was simply trying to show the editor that 'buttocks' was not part of the consensus debate, so although it's nice to compromise, it's better to come to a consensus, so I simply just reverted his edit to whatever version existed before. the_undertow 19:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Activity
Okay, I've moved you to the active list, so you will be active for all future cases. Tell me if you'd like to be activated for the cases already in progress and I'll do that too. Picaroon (t) 22:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
FA review question
Should an editor who is the subject of an open RFC be involved with an FA candidate nominated by someone who has left comments on that person's RFC? I personally see it as inappropriate as a bit of a COI issue, but see no guideline at the FA candidate page on the subject. Any guidance would be great. Thank you. Aboutmovies 23:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Judge the article and the feedback comments, not the editors. Short of an arbcom ban, I don't have a problem with anyone participating on the FAC. Raul654 02:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Sistine Chapel
Thanks, Raul! it was just a typo, that I had then copied and pasted!
I've done masses of work on Leonardo and I'm sorry that Whatsisface and Winklepicker didn't get back to check through their very long list of suggested improvements (which were nearly all done) before it was archived. (I think that providing page numbers for 150 refernces is overkill). I'll have to put it up again. I wish that this blinking computer didn't lumber along so slowly, doing anything takes ages!
If you want a laugh, take a look at the pic that someone put up on Sistine Chapel ceiling. I've transferred it to the talk page, as it was too good to delete. ;-) Amandajm 03:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- About Leonardo - take a couple weeks, make sure it's all polished up, then feel free to renominate it. There's no penalty for failure, so feel free to try again.
- That talk-page picture is very amusing :) Raul654 03:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Truthiness
Hi there. I noticed that the article on "Truthiness" is to "Today's featured article" on October 18. However, when it was put up for nomination for "Today's featured article", it asked to be displayed on October 17, to coincide with second anniversary of the creation of the term and of The Colbert Report. Can I ask why it has been put back a day please? ISD 08:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- A simple mistake on my part. I've fixed it. Raul654 13:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much
Thanks very much for all your work on FAs and for scheduling Larrys Creek for October 19, 2007 (now I don't have to argue that Nov. 5th, the date of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix and when the creek was purchased by Pennsylvania from the Iroquois, is relevant to the article). I will be double checking all the refs and making sure it is well up to snuff before the big day arrives. Please accept this WikiThanks as a small token of my sincere appreciation, Ruhrfisch ><>° 16:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Upcoming wikibreak for the FAC bot
I expect to be offwiki for while beginning the 14th. If you could, could you close a bunch of FACs on the 13th or by about mid-day 14th? The bot may be out for a week or two. Gimmetrow 00:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Can you give me another reminder on the 12th? Raul654 01:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'll also be traveling between (roughly, not sure yet) the 18th and the 22nd, and will probably have slow dialup access until the 23rd, so can you do the next batch (after the 14th) on the 17th so I botify them manually before I travel? If you promote that weekend (October 19-21), I won't be able to get to all of them on a slow connection. Yomangani knew how to help manually, but he's gone. I'll see if FVasconcellos can help out in the bot's absence, and I can keep up with the FARs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Inactive Oppose vote
A user has made an Oppose vote on a FAC I'm currently working on. I've tried to address the issue he pionted out however he said that they were "just some examples" so there may be other problem with the article that he wants to piont out. However he has been inactive for the last three day so I don't know what other problems he may have. There are also some pionts I can't address until he has replied to comments I've left.
How will you treat this Oppose vote if they remain inactive? Buc 07:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Truthiness as TFA
Could you wait with featuring this article for the April 1, 2008 mainpage instead of running it on October 17, 2007? There is discussion about what article to use for the April Fool's Main Page, and several people have suggested using this article. Thank you! Royalbroil 12:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't know that October 17 was the anniversary of the first usage. Nevermind - run it as planned. Royalbroil 14:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Best feature date for Plug-in hybrid: October 29th
I spoke with Allison Takahashi at Toyota about the date that they will unveil their production plug-in Prius which as speculated in the Japanese business press, is expected at the Tokyo Motor Show this month. Toyota has just today announced they will be showing a concept plug-in car and truck, but remain coy about the plug-in Prius, saying only that Priuses will be shown. (On the other hand, some automotive press suggests that the concept car is the successor to the Prius.) Allison wasn't able to tell me outright, but in discussing generalities it became crystal clear that if it were to be announced, it would certainly be on Monday, October 28th. Correcting for the late time zone in Japan, that would suggest the next day would be most appropriate.
There are already five outstanding date requests, the earliest of which is October 31st, but Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/October 29, 2007 is at present blank. So, in hopes that the much earlier request for the date range to feature Plug-in hybrid on the front page may allow for an exception, I throw this request upon your mercy. Beamrunner 18:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have put the lead in front-page format in Talk:Plug-in hybrid/Feature. Beamrunner 19:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
BN discussion
Raul, there's ongoing discussion at WP:BN about Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Cobi. An uninvolved 'crat's comment or action would be useful. Cheers.--chaser - t 22:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Slashdot Post
Just wanted to give you a +1 insightful for your post () in the discussion about whether Misplaced Pages has peaked or not. Definitely some interesting stuff there. JKBrooks85 20:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks :) Raul654 20:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Your thoughts are interesting. However, I think it is somewhat implausible to explain a drop of 3000 registrations per day solely in terms of vandal prevention. That's a quite large number, and my impression is that we were never fighting dozens of very large sock farms each day. Also, we were already throttling at 10 registrations per IP per day. However, maybe vandal prevention is part of it (though not if the increasing reversion rate is relevant). Lastly, let me say: I am not a dragonfly. Dragons flight 21:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I have a hard time telling you and user:DragonflySixtyseven apart. Raul654 21:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Your thoughts are interesting. However, I think it is somewhat implausible to explain a drop of 3000 registrations per day solely in terms of vandal prevention. That's a quite large number, and my impression is that we were never fighting dozens of very large sock farms each day. Also, we were already throttling at 10 registrations per IP per day. However, maybe vandal prevention is part of it (though not if the increasing reversion rate is relevant). Lastly, let me say: I am not a dragonfly. Dragons flight 21:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
New York City Meetup
New York City Meetup
|
The agenda for the next meetup includes the formation of a Wikimedia New York City local chapter. Hope to see you there!--Pharos 20:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Alternative histories, eh?
Pretty cool. What kinds do you like? 204.52.215.107 04:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)