Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Prodego (talk | contribs) at 20:31, 18 June 2006 (→Closed RFCU: huge list). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:Thatcher131/Piggybank

Thank you for your comment regarding the anons posting with my signature

Añoranza has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

We like you the way you are 8^p Añoranza 05:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

for the record

this all started because I was foolish enough to correct a minor formatting error, which seemed harmless enough at the time, guess I'll never do that again. Trust me, if I had looked all the way to the bottom of the page history and seen his name I never would have hit the edit button--152.163.100.197 05:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Frankly, I do not take accusations from IP addresses particularly seriously. Although at this point, nothing about the Merecat situation would surprise me any more. For example, it is an odd coincidence that Thewolfstar suddenly found a bunch of open proxies at Merecat's ISP. However, it seems unlikely that Merecat had access to a roadrunner IP number from New York city (per reverse DNS and Traceroute) while living in Texas.

That said, what you did seems innocent enough, fixing SpinyNorman's double redirect. Unfortunately, by reverting first it made it look like you were the one doing the blanking and redirecting, which was the real source of controversy. My only recommendation is to stop making sockpuppet accusations and posting information about Zer0's IP address and ISP. Even if you believe it to be true, it is simply disruptive at this point. Being civil, polite and reasonable will force other editors to deal with the content of your actions instead of their source. Thatcher131 05:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Closed RFCU

The |{{SUBPAGENAME}} should work, give it a minute to clear the job queue. Prodego 20:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It seems the piped categories no longer work (they have in the past, see Category:Misplaced Pages administrators). Therefore, there dosen't seem to be a way to do this. This is news to me, I have no idea why this was changed. Prodego 20:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it is fine to subst the templates, it reduces server load, and it makes the code visible. I don't think a backup archiving system is all that necessary, and in this case, what would happen if an RFCU were reopened? Wouldn't it show as closed? Prodego 20:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I ran into a situation last week where Kevin took an old request off the main page, added the top and bottom templates, but did not add it to the /Case page. I saw it because I had the case watchlisted. I was thinking what if that happens again, how will anyone know the case exists (a lost subpage with no links in to it). I thought putting in a category would work. I also thought we could change the tag in the input box to a real category "Open checkuser requests" and make it a real category rather than having the non-existant variable date category we have now. In the case of a reopened case it would still be listed as closed too but I don't see that would be a problem. Thatcher131 20:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

That is true. However, the list would be huge, almost the entirely of Special:Prefixindex, so I doubt anyone would go through the whole (alphabetically sorted) list anyway. I think the best method would be to check each case as it is removed. Prodego 20:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)