This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TParis (talk | contribs) at 17:35, 25 October 2013 (→Topic Ban appeal: I will consider the request for relaxation for the purposes of the GA review once I've reviewed the area to determine whether the dispute has crossed over there or not. If it has, I'm likely going to say no. If it has not, I'll al). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:35, 25 October 2013 by TParis (talk | contribs) (→Topic Ban appeal: I will consider the request for relaxation for the purposes of the GA review once I've reviewed the area to determine whether the dispute has crossed over there or not. If it has, I'm likely going to say no. If it has not, I'll al)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is TParis's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 |
If you have come here to change my opinion, be ready to also change yours. |
USER PAGE | TALK PAGE | CONTRIBUTIONS | AWARDS | DASHBOARD | RECALL | MOTIVES | POLITICS | RTRC |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Top Namespace Edits
Hello TParis, I frequently use your tools, and they are very informative. I was curious if it is possible to increase the amount of results for the "Top Namespace Edits" tool (the default being 100). Or if there is another tool that serves the same purpose to find more than 100 results. I have been curious about this for awhile, so I thought might as well go straight to the source. Regards, STATic message me! 03:24, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'm having trouble recalling exactly which tool you're talking about, can you give me a link?--v/r - TP 12:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oh really? You probably have more tools then you can remember aha. I was refering to this. My mistake for calling it Top Namespace Edits, I had my results for the main namespace bookmarked, so I thought that was the name of the tool. STATic message me! 13:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- I do not know if you did not see this, but I guess there is not a way to expand the search. STATic message me! 00:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Ohh yeah, sorry. I'm sorry but there is no setting to make that do anymore pages. It's limited to 100 so I don't overtax the database servers.--v/r - TP 00:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- I do not know if you did not see this, but I guess there is not a way to expand the search. STATic message me! 00:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh okay, thanks for the explanation. Regards, STATic message me! 16:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin
Hi. Since you contributed to the discussion resulting in the ban of Wikiexperts, you may want to consider the CEO's appeal at Misplaced Pages:AN#Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Titus Andronicus
You know, I was wondering what v/r stood for in all your posts! Anyhow, wanted to ask you a question about the Titus Andronicus situation. Given that the block on the page is being lifted tomorrow, I posted a question asking what happens next, given that you said three of the images were fine, I assumed those three could be put back. Perhaps I read too much into your post, I don't know. Whatever the case, when I asked the question, Werith responded with "Given the facts that have been established, (the files in question can be replaced, not easily but certainly doable), the files need to stay out of the article for failing WP:NFCC#1." This confuses me. Was there another discussion taking place somewhere? I didn't know any facts had been established. The vast majority of the editors involved in the discussion felt they didn't fail NFCC#1, yourself included. As an admin, I thought your points carried some weight, but was your involvement completely pointless? And also, is there no method of redress regarding a next move. Obviously, I can't just add them back or Werith would remove them, and we'd be back exactly where we started, so I'm wondering what one should do in these circumstances. Thanks very much. Bertaut (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) v/r can stand for "very respectful" or "very respectfully"; I've seen it both ways. It's common at the bottom of emails. Regards, — dainomite 23:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- Really? That's interesting. Is that an American thing? In Ireland, it's (semi) common to sign formal emails with RY ("respectfully yours"), BR ("Best Regards"), or in less formal communications ATB ("All the Best"). Bertaut (talk) 23:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- It could very well be an American thing. I never saw it myself until I joined the U.S. Military a few years ago and ever since then almost everyone I've exchanged an email with has had it in their email signature. Regards, — dainomite 00:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, Dainomite is right about v/r. As far as me saying that three of the images are fine, that was only in reference to the AN3 complaint and why I didn't block anyone. My opinion of WP:NFCC is as subject to consensus as anyone else'. Admins don't carry anymore weight, in that regard, but we are required to explain ourselves and there was enough criticism of my decision that an explanation was warranted. So as far as a way forward, you should seek to develop a consensus. I see that Kww and a few of ya'all have begun discussing it. I'd give discussion a few more days and then see if anyone has been convinced of either side. From my vantage point, it seems some folks feel Werieth may have some legitimate concerns and so those should be vetted. However, if discussion stalls, then a WP:NFCR discussion or WP:DSN discussion should be able to get things moving again.--v/r - TP 00:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- There's no way a consensus is going to be reached through discussion on the talk page. Werith is simply too unreasonable and refuses to have his opinion challenged. As I mentioned somewhere in the myriad of discussion, I did plan to file a WP:NFCR before everything blew up. I told Werith I would file one. It's possible that because I didn't do it straight away, he assumed I wasn't going to do it at all, which is not an unreasonable assumption. I planned on doing it the next day, but by that stage many cats had leaped amongst many pigeons. I'll do it tomorrow so. One final (two-part) question though. Given that the images are currently orphans (except the BBC one), don't they run the risk of being deleted before the WP:NFCR has run it's course? Secondly, if the purpose of the WP:NFCR is to determine whether or not the images are legitimate for usage in the article, doesn't it make more sense for them to actually be in the article whilst the discussion is ongoing, so people can see the caption and accompaying text etc rather than just looking at the image in isolation. Apologies if these are foolish questions, but I've never done anything in this area before. Bertaut (talk) 01:00, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- The CSD criteria for unused non-free files says they may be deleted after seven days. If you start a NFCR discussion tomorrow, it should be over in two days or so. You should be alright. As far as their use and context, you can use a permanent link to a historical revision of the page to demonstrate that. I don't know if Werieth is reasonable or not, I can't recall a time I've ever worked with them. But Kww is there too and if you can convince him then there is no need to also convince Werieth because the discussion has leaned a certain direction.--v/r - TP 01:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- It could very well be an American thing. I never saw it myself until I joined the U.S. Military a few years ago and ever since then almost everyone I've exchanged an email with has had it in their email signature. Regards, — dainomite 00:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Ok. Thanks very much. I appreciate the advice. Nice meeting you. Bertaut (talk) 01:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Really? That's interesting. Is that an American thing? In Ireland, it's (semi) common to sign formal emails with RY ("respectfully yours"), BR ("Best Regards"), or in less formal communications ATB ("All the Best"). Bertaut (talk) 23:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Clarification request: Ayn Rand
The clarification request that you have filed has been archived, with no action taken: For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 05:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
pcount script
Hi TParis,
Sorry to bother you. The reason I am contacting you is that the error page says you are looking after the script. Please let me know if this is inappropriate.
The "pcount" script seems to have stopped working for the German language Misplaced Pages in the last few days. (It is still working fine for the English language one, and the alternate "yaec" script is also still working even for the German language Misplaced Pages.)
pcount on de wikipedia seems to switch between the following behaviours since Saturday or Sunday:
- It claims my user does not exist, often after a long wait.
- It claims the German Misplaced Pages does not exist, often after a long wait.
- It takes so long that a proxy server times out.
pcount on en wikipedia on the other hand still works fine. Similarly it works for the English language Wiktionary, but not the German language one. Perhaps some server communications error?
Strangely, another script, yaec on de wikipedia, seems to have no problem accessing the German Misplaced Pages. (But perhaps it simply does less work and so is less affected by any network problems?)
Thanks.
--SpecMade (talk) 23:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Try this one http://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/pcount/ and please update any links to toolserver on de Misplaced Pages to reflect the new URL.--v/r - TP 23:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, that works much better (and faster). It does give an error message before the result though:
Warning: syntax error, unexpected '=' in Unknown on line 33 in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 75 Warning: array_merge(): Argument #2 is not an array in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 75 Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 79 Warning: syntax error, unexpected '=' in Unknown on line 33 in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 75 Warning: array_merge(): Argument #2 is not an array in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 75 Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /data/project/xtools/public_html/phptemp/PHPtemp.php on line 79 SpecMade - {#tool#} - X!'s tools
- BTW, I found the link on de:Spezial:Beiträge/SpecMade (at the bottom at "Beitragszähler (detailliert)"). Do you happen to know who can fix the links on those Special: pages? (Don't worry if not, I'll ask on its talk page then.) Thanks again. --SpecMade (talk) 23:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- I thought I fixed that error already about an hour ago. Try it again and let me know. As far as who can update the link, ask an admin.--v/r - TP 00:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the script is working fine now. About updating the link I have asked on de.wikipedia (but it's night time in DE now). Thanks for all your help! --SpecMade (talk) 00:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Just to close this out, the link has been fixed too. Thanks. --SpecMade (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the script is working fine now. About updating the link I have asked on de.wikipedia (but it's night time in DE now). Thanks for all your help! --SpecMade (talk) 00:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- I thought I fixed that error already about an hour ago. Try it again and let me know. As far as who can update the link, ask an admin.--v/r - TP 00:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- BTW, I found the link on de:Spezial:Beiträge/SpecMade (at the bottom at "Beitragszähler (detailliert)"). Do you happen to know who can fix the links on those Special: pages? (Don't worry if not, I'll ask on its talk page then.) Thanks again. --SpecMade (talk) 23:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
iPad Air
Thanks for the move. Think you could re-unite Talk:IPad air with it's original host, iPad Air? I assume the page history of Talk:IPad Air should be preserved somehow. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 19:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- No problem, it's done.--v/r - TP 19:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Pages created
https://toolserver.org/~tparis/pages/index.php?name=Kaiyr&lang=ru&wiki=wikipedia&namespace=0&redirects=noredirects&getall=1 «Unknown database 'ruwiki_p'MySQL ERROR! Table 'toolserver.user' doesn't exist» - please fix. --Sunpriat (talk) 21:04, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Toolserver is being shut down Dec 31st. Try the WMFLabs version and please update all links on RU Misplaced Pages. http://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/pages/index.php?name=Kaiyr&lang=ru&wiki=wikipedia&namespace=0&redirects=noredirects.--v/r - TP 22:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Main page talk page
Just to let you know, there's the beginnings of a discussion concerning your protection here. J Milburn (talk) 10:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- Concerning this - I don't think anyone was trying to be snarky. The concern was more 'why are we using a week of protection in this scenario' - a question which was perfectly valid. Don't take it personally, as I'm sure Modest Genius' intention wasn't to call you out with the intent of disparaging your good name. Cheers, m.o.p 23:25, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
37 TRW
Cool. Just make sure everything is correct Thank you :) Bwmoll3 (talk) 15:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Lou Sander
Lou Sander notified the following individuals:
- Liz
- Annalisa_Ventola
- Tento2
- Askahrc
- Iantresman
- David_in_DC
about a discussion where the dispute was "How should the mainstream view of "science has become a series of dogmas" be addressed in the lead?"
In order to determine if those individuals were supportive of the mainstream principles of science, we review their histories in the field.
- Liz has stated that she believes "There are Editors, skeptics, who do monitor all articles they label pseudoscience. That's not a conspiracy, they say as much on their User Pages that this is their interest on Misplaced Pages. I don't think they are evil, they are just quick to label any person who believes in alternate views of science as "fringe" or a "quack" and they don't want people with those views editing Misplaced Pages." She may very well be right. This is, however, a clear predisposition towards one side of the conflict - one hostile to the mainstream principles of science .
- Annalisa_Ventola believes that Parapsychology is science.
- Tento2 has supported including content supportive of Sheldrake from "The Institute of Noetic Sciences,"
- Askahrc has removed parapsychologist from the subject's description .
- Iantresman was banned as a result of his being a "general POV-warrior of all sorts of pseudoscience and fringe science ideas."
- David_in_DC, while the lest egregious of the notifications, supports a lede which excludes the word parapsychologist from the description of Sheldrake (User:Tumbleman/sandbox#Alternate_lede_proposal).
Without arguing that this selection of editors are right or wrong about the content dispute (because we don't argue content here at this encyclopedia, just make sure no one uses the word fuck!), it is clear that the failure to notify vzaak, for instance, is glaring. Why was vzaak not notified? Should vzaak assume it's because he does not "know how to express opinions politely and helpfully?" That's incivil. Is it because Lou assumes vzaak will disagree with him? That's canvassing. Is it an oversight? Possibly, but then let's ask the same question about everyone who clearly disagrees with Lou on the talk page. OSTheRobot (talk) 18:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- You do realize that although you've expressed to Fluffernutter that you do not want to be connected to your real account, which hasn't edited in a year, that I'm going to have to assume socking? I'm very likely to simply delete this from my user page w/in 24 hours because I believe that promoting socking (by acknowledging issues brought up by socks) is more damaging to the encyclopedia than addressing the issues they bring up. I don't know your story, but if you're an indef banned disruptive user, then the best course of action is to not give you a reason to return.--v/r - TP 21:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I know you have better things to do than wade through the muck that section has become as the various sides again post their walls of only semi relevant text, particularly when you have also been pinged by someone who screams SOCK!!! I am sorry that I notified the editors which led to the new diarrhea of text, but I thought it was a necessary step when naming someone on the boards. I am hoping that my post that led to their notification doesn't get lost.
this notification by Lou is particularly telling. He titles the section heading with "Sheldrake/Tumbleman" although the section on the talk page has nothing to do with Tumbleman who had been indeffed several days before. Liz has been an ardent advocate encouraging Tumbleman and as can be seen here (uncollapse the Tumbleman results) Iantresman and Askahrc also speak in favor of him. None of the people who spoke against his actions in the AE were notified by Lou Sander. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 09:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- if you look at [this discussion about whether or not to use the word "hypothesis" you will find in support of the idea (indeffed user Tumbleman), iantresman, Annalisa Ventola. none of the people speaking against the use of the word "hypothesis" were in the "randomly" selected users notified by Lou Sander. Do you need more? I hate to have people have to slog through the mire on this topic.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 09:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)}
Thank you for your time. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- TRPoD, I gave Lou this message and his reply was "Got it, thanks". Let's give him time to see if the message sunk in.--v/r - TP 13:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
About X!'s Edit Counter and an error
Hello. Firstly I want to thank you for your work in this tool, very useful to most of wikipedians of all wikis; but this is not the matter I want to tell you.
Sometimes —and now from some days ago— I get a rare error when I try to count my edits on Spanish Misplaced Pages (my home wiki), with this message: ″Zerabat no existe″ (translated in english: ″Zerabat does not exist″). However, when I tried to see my edits on English Misplaced Pages, after a long time loading the page (toolserver is veeery slow) I finally saw my edits there. I do not know if it is an error when the tool try to connect to ESWIKI database or why, but this is not the only case I know in ESWIKI. My user account really exists. I would like to know what is the cause of this. Greets. --Zerabat (talk) 13:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Are you using the toolserver version or the WMFLabs version?--v/r - TP 13:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Topic Ban appeal
I saw your notice.
I request an immediate relaxation in respect of the articles History of the metric system and International System of Units, both of which are currently being reviewed as WP:Good Articles.
I also request an immediate relaxation in respect of an SPA that I am about to place on another user.
Thank you.
Martinvl (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- I will consider the request for relaxation for the purposes of the GA review once I've reviewed the area to determine whether the dispute has crossed over there or not. If it has, I'm likely going to say no. If it has not, I'll allow you to finish the GA process on those two articles only. I'll let you know later today. I'm unable to relax the topic ban with respect to this other user, however.--v/r - TP 17:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)