Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:22, 16 December 2010

User talk:Netalarm/Header

ya beat me!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		ya beat me to a reversion > tinychat i must need to get rid of some tabs or something lol :) Keastes thyself 23:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

It's Me

I'm the guy who u said wouldn't be adopted if the account was ip or shared. It is not shared, but it is an IP. The problem is if I got a real account my sheltering parents would KILL me! When they found out I was even going on here, they were all like, Oh reeaally??? HELP!!!! 68.45.138.109 (talk) 22:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... so your IP doesn't change every few days or so? I guess it might be possible, but let me discuss this with others first, since this has not been done before (or, at least, many times). Netalarm 03:38, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

If it's a static IP, I don't have any problems with them being adopted, however, the program is called Adopt-a-user not Adopt-a-user-and-IP... —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 5:10pm • 06:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank ya kindly, pardner! lol 68.45.138.109 (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

BLP report format

Hi, could use a little discussion, no hurry no worry, regarding the change in report format at the BLPN http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#report_formating - Off2riorob (talk) 23:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, that was by no means the final product. I'll post there in a short while. Netalarm 05:06, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

speek.it - A7 Speedy Deletion

Does speek.it still qualify for speedy deletion? I've listed the importance. Please feel free to send over more feedback. Thanks. Kennybastani (talk) 04:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Yup, it has already been deleted. An article must indicate why the subject is notable enough for inclusion, otherwise it risks being deleted. More information regarding the requirement may be found at Misplaced Pages:A7#A7. Netalarm 04:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Anshul (talk) 13:58, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Cleaning up adopt-a-user

{{adminhelp}} Could someone modify User talk:Reliableforever/Archive 1 and add the TL template to the adoption offer from Mizu onna sango15 in June 2008? The final product should look something like {{adoptoffer}}. This is needed to prevent the page from showing up at Category:Wikipedians having been offered adoption in June 2008 and Category:Wikipedians having been offered adoption, which is currently being reorganized to provide for better organization. After that's done, please delete the June 2008 category. Thanks! Netalarm 19:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done Favonian (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Good work

		The Adopt-a-User Barnstar
		For all your efforts to improve the Adopt-a-user program. From our recent work to eliminate the backlog, to your efforts in matching adoptees, your work in the project is much appreciated. Swarm 23:59, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

A proposition

I've seen your work with anti-vandalism, LTA, and abuse response, and I was wondering if you think the extra toolkit would help. --Dylan620 21:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! Haven't talked to you in a long time :P. Right now I don't believe I would need the tools, as most of my work centers around redesigning the noticeboards and getting neglected projects back on track (User:Netalarm/Labs). If I ever come across a page that needs to be deleted or protected, or see an user that needs to be blocked, I'll just post at the appropriate noticeboard and let an administrator take care of it. Thank you for the kind offer, and I appreciate your thoughtfulness, but I do not believe I have a need for the tools right now. The process is also ... not something I'd want to go through. I'll simply continue on helping where I can. Netalarm 03:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, just let me know if/when you change your mind. :) --Dylan620 04:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Huggle

When are you going to use Huggle again? WAYNEOLAJUWON 21:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, overlooked a few message on my talk page. Regarding Huggle, I don't plan on using it again (or patrolling recent changes) in the near future. Netalarm 05:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Dispute

Hi Netalarm. I have noticed what you have done. However, Fudan University is still "one of the oldest and most selective universities in China", and it is 3 yrs younger than Beijing Normal University. Can I add the same thing to Beijing Normal University? And Wuhan University "is regarded as one of the top ten universities in China."? I would like to meet the person who has that opinion. Can I add the same thing to Beijing Normal University? If I add it, then it would be "promotional material"; if I dont add it, then it is unfair to Beijing Normal University.

OK. I am not trying to start a fight or something. But I really want to know your opinions when it comes to this kind of stuff. Thanks a lot! Visame (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - cite a verifiable, reliable source.  Chzz  ►  01:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

And Chzz replies when I'm eating :P. Reading those links would provide you with the information you'll need to understand what needs to be done. Of course, if after reading that you have any questions, feel free to ask me or Chzz. Netalarm 01:42, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Citations added and I also organized the references. Hope it works this time. Best Regards. Visame (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Abuse BY Admin

How can I report consistent abuse of priveledges BY an Admin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.244.9 (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Admin#Disputes_or_complaints. Guoguo12--Talk--  02:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

HAPPY HOLIDAYS

Holiday Card from Mlpearc
HAPPY HOLIDAYS ! Wishing you and yours a very peaceful and joyous holiday season Mlpearc Ambience

What the...

Netalarm!!!! You're back!!! The Arbiter_★ 20:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hehe. Yup! Netalarm 22:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Info about adopt-a-user

Hi NetAlarm -- thanks for your response, and your offer to supply more info about the adopt-a-user program. I'm involved pretty heavily right now in a historical analysis of the program; who's in it, who isn't, what kind of effect adoption has on editing, that sort of thing. I plan to share what I learn to hopefully help improve the program. I'd love to ask you a couple of questions; so that I ask you relevant info, can you tell me what your specific experience is? In other words, have you been an adoptee, adopter, both, neither, other? I don't see any adoption boxes on your user page, but it does seem that you're currently a very active maintainer of the program. SeparateWays (talk) 17:43, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I haven't adopted anyone or been adopted before. My main contributions to the program are the redesigning and the behind the scenes maintenance to keep the program going. For example, I've removed ~550 adoptme and adoptoffer templates from old offers to clean up the categories and redesigned the categories and some pages to make them more effective. I guess this would better show how I'm involved with the program. The biggest problem with the program right now is the lack of dedicated adopters who are checking the category of users seeking adoption and the lack of responses from the potential adoptees. You may also be interested in User:Netalarm/Survey, which is another attempt to fix that problem. Basically, I'm here to revitalize the program, and then I'll actively adopt once that's done. It's really difficult to work in a program if the basic foundation isn't working. Netalarm 22:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing all you're doing, NetAlarm -- hopefully it really helps revitalize the program. What can you tell me, if anything, about the management of the program, historical and present? It seems that right now you're the closest thing the program has to a leader (or is facilitator a better word)? Before you dropped in, it seems that the program was on auto-pilot. That's what I've figured out from reading some of the history pages, that over time some folks have come and gone, but mostly the program propels itself. Is that accurate, or do you have a better sense about what makes the program go? SeparateWays (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

There's generally been a lack of management in the past. In the present, I believe we're doing a much better job of coordinating the program and making sure requests are responded to in a timely manner. Ideally, the program would run itself, with adoptees seeking out adopters and adopters seeking out adoptees, but I'm finding that that model doesn't really work. There were massive backlogs at the request page, which doesn't really make sense when you have over 100 adopters and around 20 potential adoptees. So I guess the auto-pilot was failing and the program was flying dangerously low when a few of us decided to step in and take over the controls. Why wasn't it working? People weren't checking the adoptees and the adoptees simply placed the request templates and left. I mean, simply looking at the current list of people that want to be adopted, very few of them have even asked an adopter or edited after requesting adoption. We really need the effort of both sides to make this work, and we're trying to change that. If you have any suggestions, they would be greatly appreciated. If you don't mind me asking, why are you analyzing the history of this program? (It just seems odd to me adoption would draw any attention from researchers) Netalarm 06:09, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for asking about why we're working on this! This effort is part of a larger project geared towards learning how to make online communities with content of value (like Misplaced Pages) even better; how to get more people involved, how to make people there more productive, and so on. There's a huge population of people out there that could make massive contributions to Misplaced Pages, and we're researching how to get them involved by using a mixture of social science and computer science analysis and tools. Mentoring is a classic way of helping new folks integrate into a system and be productive; there is a considerable amount of literature about workplace mentoring. Mentoring in online communities might be similar, and might be really different. The fact that there is a mentoring program in Misplaced Pages (adopt-a-user) with years of historical data made it an obvious program to research, both from the perspective of what effects it has had, as well as how we might be able to help improve it in the future. SeparateWays (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

For you :)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		This is just to let you know, I have listed you as "friendly person" on my friendly userpage :) Sophie 11:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi Netalarm, you're right about the archive searching but I believe the instructions should at the very least is useful. Regards, —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 1:49pm • 02:49, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Instructions are useful, but with the new guide and all, it's really too big to be included on the main page directly. After the discussion with the proposed change is complete, I'll look into making the header reflect those changes. I'm thinking the bot could include the review requirement in its message so people will know directly. But ya, right now I'm really just looking for input on the new proposal. Netalarm 06:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Rabbi Pinto

Rabbi Pinto i have tried repeatedly to add info but it gets whitewashed by people who are single interest users. All of the sources mention the Rabbis' negative history (The Haaretz article says hes not known in Israel), and every article mentions a $30 Million building - They refuse to use the info and its all propoganda. Even the person who started the article on Wiki has been edited out. help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 (talk) 17:55, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Please see the reply from Yworo on the noticeboard, which answers this question in great detail. If theres anything you cannot understand or have any questions, feel free to reply there and we'll get back to you. Netalarm 02:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Message from DuskClops

Hello Netalarm. I just wanted to stop by and say thank you for the advice. I just started Misplaced Pages not to long ago. I haven't a clue what to talk about so I'll just take my leave. Thank you very much. DuskClops —Preceding unsigned comment added by DuskClops (talk • contribs) 21:27, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome! If you have any questions or need any help, you can always come to me. Have fun! Netalarm 02:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Bishop Challenor Secondary School

Thanks for your helpful and constructive edits to the Bishop Challoner Catholic Secondary School‎, which until then was really just a copy of their own web site. So how did someone from Chicago wander into Basingstoke :) Scillystuff (talk) 11:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that elusive reference! Google was having a hard time looking for any reliable indicators that the school had won the award. Hmmm... there seems to be a secret tunnel from Chicago to Basingstoke via the promotional article tunnel, which Basingstoke connected to when it was tagged :P Netalarm 20:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Odd template

{{helpme}} Could someone take a look at Template:Adoptme and see what's wrong with the category? It shows up in Category:Misplaced Pages Adopt-a-User, so I added it to Category:Misplaced Pages Adopt-a-user to reflect a change in the project's capitalization. However, I can't find a reason why it's still in the old category. Could someone remove it from the old? Thanks. Netalarm 21:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

You have to change in the documentation. Self-revert your last edit to the template proper and change the cat in the /doc and the problem should be solved. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Netalarm 22:00, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

San Francisco Academy Orchestra

I saw your note at COIN. You're right about notability. There aren't many sources on this organization under either its current or its former name: San Francisco Student Philharmonic. All I found was a couple of short notes in the SF Chronicle, and a few playbills and press releases. A fair number of mentions on various web sites, though most of those probably don't count as reliable sources. Not sure that the article would pass an AFD. Fladrif (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The crusade against a certain spiritual leader

I believe it should be called 'anti-canvassing' when an editor constantly publicizes his cause on the pages of people unlikely to support him. One more revert on the main article, though, and it's time for WP:ANEW. EdJohnston (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

:P Much better than by original "Canvas waning" --> warning. Netalarm 05:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion to improve WP:BLPN's Reporting form/Create Report

Hi, in case you don't see this. Cheers! A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I didn't mean to....

Hi, Netalarm.... i just saw your msg & edit on my user page, actually i didn't have proper idea about the requirements for genuine wikipedia administrator, i really appreciate you for this because now i know, what i need to be an admin. Bill william compton (talk) 09:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. If you want to become an administrator in the future, it is highly suggested that you participate in a wide variety of activities on Misplaced Pages first, such as writing articles, deletion discussions, etc. If you're interested, you can also look over the Misplaced Pages:Administrators' reading list and Misplaced Pages:What adminship is not to get the idea of what administrators do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Cya around! Netalarm 05:20, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for replying to Kuguar on my talk page. You summed up what I was going to say quite nicely. In fact, you probably said it even better than I would've:) Cheers!--Piast93 16:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Avoiding personal attacks

I noticed you decided to join in with Piast93's rather ridiculous smearing of me. In the future you might want to actually look at the situation before attacking another user. The issue is pretty black and white - I nominated an article for deletion after due consideration, and someone with little knowledge of the topic or situation criticized me for doing so. That is a personal attack and an assumption of bad faith. You are not helping wikipedia by supporting such actions. Kuguar03 (talk) 20:12, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Hold on a second. I took a look at all this conversation on his talk page, and no one is smearing you. All Piast93 did was give you some advice about maybe not nominating articles for deletion so quickly. Nowhere did anyone make any personal attack against you. No one has cast any doubt on your value as a Misplaced Pages editor. We all make mistakes, and we should help each other to learn from them. Don't take offense at something that may sound slightly insulting, but in reality is in good faith. Cheers, The Arbiter 23:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I've read over everything related to it before commenting, as I always do. There really are no personal attacks, just honest suggestions that are intended to help you become a better editor. Maybe if you looked at it that way you'll see what we're all trying to say. Netalarm 05:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Please help me understand this, then. Here's my perspective: While looking through articles related to off-road racing to identify areas needing improvement, a topic I'm reasonably knowledgeable about (though by no means an expert), I find a clearly promotional article on a minor series I've never heard of. The given sources just parrot the same promotional information, suggesting it comes from some common source, i.e., some press release. Googling finds only the website and some videos, plus some other links that have both the words "jeep" and "speed" but nothing about the series. Despite a claim of association with Best in the Desert I can find no mention on their website. A quick check of the history shows it was previously nominated for speedy delete due to lack of sources. While there are sources now, notability still isn't established in my opinion. It seems like an uncontroversial deletion, so I add the proposed deletion tag. It gets removed. Ok, so it is controversial. The next step is AfD. I nominate it, notify the only 2 editors involved, and even place a note on the Wikiproject:Motorsport to help generate more discussion and maybe find interested editors. After a couple of days, 3 editors have supported keeping the article, so I withdraw my nomination. I still don't feel the subject is notable, but wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and if other editors disagree and are willing to fix up the article then so be it. The goal of collaboratively building an encyclopedia seems to have been advanced.

So it's not clear to me at what point in that process I did something wrong. I might have missed something, but I've reviewed Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, or Misplaced Pages:Proposed deletion and don't feel like I did anything wrong. Sure, other editors disagreed with my views, but I didn't argue with them or try to pound home my views when it was clear the consensus was against me, and the attention brought to the article will likely result in further improvement. All part of the process, as far as I can tell.

But apparently I did do something majorly wrong. And even though I can't figure out what it is, it is so blindingly obvious that an editor who, as far as I can tell, has no edits on any motorsport-related article felt it was necessary to drop into the discussion four days after it had run its course to tell me that I should "show more discretion in nominating articles"? What does that even mean? The usage that makes the most sense is the 2nd one given here, so I lack "The ability to make wise choices or decisions"? How did they arrive at this judgment? There is a clear implication that I was hasty or uninformed by nominating this article, and therefore not acting in good faith. This also constitutes a personal attack in both the sense of "Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence" and more generally "disparaging an editor". Also, the reason they gave for keeping the article was unrelated to the reasons for nomination, suggesting maybe they didn't look to closely, but that's not terribly important.

So again, where am I wrong? Here you said that I wasn't careful and didn't review the article in depth. Again, what's the basis for this judgment? I did far more than review the article in depth, and to casually assume I didn't is clearly a failure to assume good faith. And then here another editor says that I nominated the article too quickly and made a mistake.

I'm really trying to understand your view here. How is this "just honest suggestions that are intended to help become a better editor"? Going out of one's way to thoroughly access an article's merit before nomination doesn't strike me as poor editing. But apparently it is, so please tell me what more I could have done. And ill-informed drive-by comments on stale discussions that disparage other editors seems like incredibly poor and unconstructive behavior, but apparently it's an excellent contribution. Again please explain why this is the case. How is this "honest" and "in good faith"? It makes no sense. Kuguar03 (talk) 03:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)