User talk:Poccil/archive3

Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive1 at 21:34, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
Archived to User talk:Poccil/archive2 at 16:57, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
/Unverified images

Hungarian language

You might want to review Hungarian language closely (from its history, I gather that you have been particularly involved with it). In the last few days, User:Antifinnugor has been changing major and minor points, mainly to reflect the position expressed in his user name (i.e. the alleged non-existence of the Finno-Ugric language family). As such, I think much of the changes should be considered POV. As for me, I am trying to stay out of this business as much as possible, partly since I don't know anything about Hungarian, but also because I have been engaged earlier in several unpleasant debates with this user (see for example Talk:Finno-Ugric languages, Talk:Uralic languages and User talk:Antifinnugor). Kind regards — mark ✎ 22:38, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

British/American 'bug'

You are quite right, 'bug' does mean insect in both - it was a stupid mistake of me not to make that clear.

However, I would say that bug as insect is not the most common usage in British english - it is used to refer to insects only rarely, and probably from american influence. It's far more common to use it as an error in a computer program, and probably the next most common meaning is 'a clandestine listening device'. I suspect the British english equivalent of 'bug'is 'creepy-crawly'. Would you disagree? WLD 08:18, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I was not aware of how British people use "bug"; only that the meanings did not seem that dissimilar to the two versions of English. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 16:51, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

No problem - if I explain in the same was as above, would you object to it being put back in? I wouldn't want an edit war. WLD 22:04, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

According to my British English A to Zed, the most common UK usage of "bug" is as a reference to a flu-related disease. Niteowlneils 06:17, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 most active Wikipedians, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. -- Ram-Man 21:27, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 02:40, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Just another friendly reminder. Thanks! Hyacinth 18:38, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

And I quote: "Always fill the summary field. Even a short summary is better than no summary." Hyacinth 00:06, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Erika Steinbach

What's your problem with Erika Steinbach/Erika of Rumia? [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 08:45, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

That it's in the main namespace. It was never intended to be a Wikipedia article, as it clearly explains. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 15:45, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, but why speedy delete it, without correcting the links and letting me copy it to my own namespace if it was that of a problem for you? It was definitely not nice. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 19:42, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

References

In the article of von you removed the reference. I wish you wouldn't do that. I took this mans intellectual property and placed it here. This man should get the credit. What basis did you use to remove the reference? It is like stealing from the man! Please don't do that.WHEELER 17:27, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wolfberry

Okay, does this clean up for wolfberry work for you? Carter 20:16, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

When you list an article for speedy deletion that doesn't seem intended to be patent nonsense, it would be courteous to inform the person who created the article. You listed Council of Biology Editors for speedy, which I created, citing that it redirected to itself. The article did indeed suffer from that problem, which was a mistake on my part; I meant to redirect it to Council of Science Editors, which I have now done. However, if I had not stumbled across the redlink, the redirect would have been just lost for a long time. So if you could, try asking the user who created the article if the user who made it usually makes good edits and it reasonably looked like there was at least an intention to do something good with the article. Thanks, and happy editing. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 01:41, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

NPOV - blinded link

Hi, why did you remove that link? Paranoid 20:37, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dillonism

Hi,
You seem to know something about dillonisms, at any rate enough to know that they exist outside the perturbed brain of some miserable vandal. Could you elaborate on this? How did Alain Dillon's name get attached to this condition, anyway? Psychological case studies are usually known anonymously. --Smack 04:46, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I meant to write "Actual condition?" on the listing, meaning that I wasn't sure whether Dillonism existed. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:50, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

/Automation.js

This looks like a very useful script; is there any chance you could adapt it to handle the Wikipedia:deletion process? Drop me a note on my talk page if you'd be willing; I'd be very grateful. —No-One Jones ^(m) 08:45, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thankyouthankyouthankyou. I put up the HTML source for the deletion dialog box on User:Mirv/deletion source. If you need any more information please let me know. —No-One Jones ^(m) 22:49, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You wrote: What is the URL to the special page for deletion? I know it's not Special:Delete or Special:Deletepage; I've tried both.

It's an action code like that used to access the history or add a page to your watchlist: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Some_page&action=delete. —No-One Jones ^(m) 00:24, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you again. One last question, and please forgive my technical incompetence: How do I run this thing? —No-One Jones ^(m) 00:57, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Alright. It edits the VFD subpage, adds the tags, then when it hits Special:Whatlinkshere/Whatever it puts up the following URL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=function%20redir(pg,other,note){%20var%20doc=navigate(ie,"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title="+pg+"&action=edit")%20if(!note)note=""%20if(note)note="%20-%20"+note%20var%20t="#redirect%20"+unescape(other)+""%20doc.editform.wpTextbox1.value=t%20doc.editform.wpSummary.value=t+note%20waitHrefChange(ie,doc,function(){doc.editform.wpSave.click()},3)}&action=delete

and chokes, going straight to Bad title. —No-One Jones ^(m) 01:50, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. One more question: Can I run this on more than one page at a time? i.e. If I add

vfddelete("Some page")

vfddelete("Some other page")

vfdkeep("Another page")

will it run the script on all of them? —No-One Jones ^(m) 02:08, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Another problem: If the talk page of an article to be deleted is nonexistent, I get the standard internal error one gets when trying to delete a non-existent page. Can this step be skipped if the talk page doesn't exist? —No-One Jones ^(m) 02:25, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Now it's running well, except it's not deleting the pages; I think it's not checking the confirmation checkbox on the deletion dialog (the <input type='checkbox' name='wpConfirm' value='1' id='wpConfirm' /> bit of the deletion source.) —No-One Jones ^(m) 02:50, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Don Estridge

No need to list this article for speedy deletion because of copyright problems; it is already listed at WP:CP, and will be deleted in due course if no valid objections are raised. Thue | talk 14:21, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Alexander Filipov

Greetings. You tagged Alexander Filipov for speedy deletion, and gave the reason that "The contents of this page have been moved to Filipov" But that page seems to not exist. Did you mean a different page?

Similarly, you tagged Homeorhesis, saying it was moved to Wiktionary, but it doesn't seem to be in Wiktionary. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 19:28, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

The trouble is, http://sep11.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transwiki:Alexander_Filipov doesn't seem to exist either. And the word "homeorhesis" isn't on Wiktionary at all. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 19:40, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Transwiki script

It might be good to change the transwiki automation script to edit the transwiki log at the destination project. If I hadn't checked Wikibooks' recent changes, I wouldn't have known a lot of transwikied articles had been moved over there. Gentgeen 01:38, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Reports

Hi Peter, the issue isn't getting access to the database, it's lack of time. I've got a to-do list for work & the Wikipedia as long as my arm, and it only ever seems to get longer :-( Honestly, your best bet is probably just to set MySQL up on your machine, and download the latest Wikipedia dump, and run TB's scripts on it. If you wait for me, you might very well be waiting until the middle of 2005 before anything gets done :-( Sorry, I know that's not what you want to hear, but it's better than me saying yes, and then nothing happening. All the best, -- Nickj 07:25, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Topsail

What on earth possessed you to transwiki topsail? The article is the complete opposite of a dictionary definition. You should look at an article's content and perhaps ask knowledgeable people before trying to delete this sort of content. Stan 07:38, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I had to revert a few of your moves to Wiktionary, and I'll probably have to do more. I assume you were running your script on the huge pileup of things to be moved to Wiktionary, which is helpful, but some of the older pages listed there (like topsail) had been converted into valid articles in the interim and should not have been transwikied. Thanks for clearing some of the backlog, though. —No-One Jones 07:47, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Huge chunk of carelessness on my part. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 07:49, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Hardly your fault; that page is so poorly maintained that some of the items had been sitting there for over a year, and the lack of timestamps on many of them made that difficult to sort out. And again, many of the transwikis were valid and proper; notice all the red links in the stuff you added to the Transwiki log. —No-One Jones 08:10, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Precepts of Kato Kiyomasa

Hi, you transwikied The Precepts of Kato Kiyomasa to [1] as an empty page. Maybe some vandal blanked it before the transfer or something went wrong, I don't know. Is it possible for you to correct this without all the hassle of formal votes for undeletion? I'm willing to do all the editing and link correcting that non-admin can do after I get a copy of the precepts in wikisource. Thanks, jni 13:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bios of Australian politicos

Thanks for taking a look at those articles. Perhaps you could make the same observation on some of the talk pages, as an experiment to see whether Adam will respond to social pressure. --H.K. 15:50, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

election controversies cleanup listing

I removed the cleanup header from the article but kept the listing on the main clean up page since all help is welcome with the article. However, I think there is a POV problem with the way you listed the election controverises article on the clean up page, you said remove "POV and fluff" -- it is widly disputed that the article actually contains either of those, people that believe that certainly haven't been making many edits to the article or engaging in talk page discussions. Considering the size and scope of the election controversies issue I think we've done a good job at minimalizing "POV and fluff". Note the article overwhelmingly survived VfD with a keep, it was not a vote to keep it only if cleaned up. So perhaps you could rewrite the cleanup listing you wrote or perhaps remove it entirely? zen master 07:05, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I reworded the listing. Apparently the election controversies article was much more controversial than I imagined. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 07:13, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

thx. It's not just controversial, some people have been using the VfD process as a weapon to damage an article they don't like, and to waste everyone's time dealing with it there. They knew, or should have known, there wouldn't be anything approaching near consensus for deletion. The main election controversies article overwhelmingly survived another Vfd just 2-3 weeks ago. Is seems there is a script that puts a cleanup tag on every article that survives Vfd now? Perhaps "POV and fluff" in the checkin comments should be changed to something less POV? :-) zen master 07:21, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Battle of Dunkirk and marking copyvios as speedy

In generel I don't think you should mark copyvios as speedy. Deleting them is better handled as part of WP:CP IMO. There may of course be some special cases where it is appropriate.

Case in point Battle of Dunkirk, which upon investigation (see talk page) turned out not to a copyvio at all. Thue | talk 11:01, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

School tables

Great. Thanks for the offer. Since I (unexpectedly) am working this month, I won't be able to give the project as much time as I thot when I started it last weekend. I've done all the (public--my source data doesn't include private schools) schools in Rhode Island, User:Niteowlneils/Rhode Island schools. Getting a wiki table markup version before creating any more would be great. I don't know how much scripting experience you have, but it would be awesome to have an automated way to get it all the way from a raw (but sorted) CSV file--EG:

"Barrington High School","Barrington Sch Dist","Bristol","Barrington","985"
"Burrillville High School","Burrillville Sch Dist","Providence","Harrisville","907"

Ideally expanding things like Sch and Dist, and making the cities and counties proper links. Niteowlneils 02:13, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused. User:Niteowlneils/Rhode Island schools is still HTML--the only difference seems to be that it now includes all RI schools, instead of having the Providence county schools in a separate table--I was looking for an HTML->wiki table conversion tool, not combining the two tables--it took some work to separate them into a more managable size (especially as a 'proof of concept' for larger states). Niteowlneils 06:18, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

To try and clarify, I guess I was asking for two things. One to convert the two HTML Rhode Island tables into Wiki table markup. The second to convert CSV files directly into Wiki table markup, so I don't have to spend time converting the CSV into HTML markup. And, as to splitting them up, my idea was to split off large counties into their own tables, with the leftovers in a combined table (I think the 32K limit is a bit antiquated, but would still like to keep everything under 50-60K). If you want to post the script you used, I could use it for that--if it's more than a couple lines, you could email it to neilsmith at jps dot net. As for the name(s), I think "list" usually implies just a list of links to separate articles, which is specifically what I am trying to avoid, so that's why I named them as I did. Niteowlneils 06:29, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Update on school tables

I ended up not using the script, as the more I thot about it, and compared the two formats, the more I felt HTML tables would be much easier to expand and maintain, keeping it line-per-row, making it easier to sort, and to tell what's going on. I think I may have used [2] or [3] to convert one file to HTML, but mostly I've done it search and replace in a text editor, as I'm not just converting, but adding a second row per school, and width attributes. I've done four tables (Rockingham County Public Schools, Washington, DC schools, and Rhode Island schools/Providence County, Rhode Island schools, but probably won't do any more until I get some feedback on a number of issues: besides establishing a naming convention, should the school names be hilited (IE italic or bold), should alternating schools have a different background color to make it more clear what's going on and if so what color, whether anybody has strong objections to leaving them as HTML tables instead of Wiki table markup, whether anybody thinks there might be enuf interest to make a formal 'US schools' WikiProject, and any other thots people might have about what to include. I'll probably post a note on the Village Pump tonight or tomorrow. The two main things I'm looking to automate now are: conversion to mixed case (most of the data is ALL CAPS)--I'm using a trial version of software that I don't like enuf to pay for at the end of the trial period, and hiding the redundant mentions of the state names, EG converting [[Bristol County, Rhode Island]] to [[Bristol County, Rhode Island|Bristol County]] and [[Barrington, Rhode Island]] to [[Barrington, Rhode Island|Barrington]]. Niteowlneils 05:05, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The script already creating mixed case is certainly good news. As for multiple counties, I'd be inclined to try and avoid that--I'd lean towards breakouts by single counties or school districts, then 'everything else' in the main state table. "List" on Wikipedia tends to imply just a list of links to separate articles, with no data, which is the opposite of what I see these being--I think the main question is "[state] schools" or "schools in/of [state]". As for a WikiProject, once all the state and state/county or /district articles are created, it's probably possible to create stubs for the school district articles, from the same data (I'm thinking of creating Rambot-style article starters), but no, beyond that, that would probably be the end of it. Niteowlneils 05:45, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

PS There would also be creating redirs for unique school names (I don't believe there is more than one Port Angeles High School) or disambs (I seem to have graduated from one of at least 12 Roosevelt High Schools. Niteowlneils 06:11, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Parlour game

I expanded parlour game, adding a bit on the history and general characteristics, but the article is still a bit vague. Should I leave it on Requests for Expansion or delete the request? Sayeth 05:10, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

Tucson, Arizona and more

Hi. I saw that you voted on the RFC regarding Tucson, Arizona, and I thought you might be interested in commenting on a broader application of the formatting to other city articles. The discussion (for now) is at Talk: Tucson, Arizona#Other Arizona and nearby cities. (It might get moved to WikiProject Cities, if there's interest in doing so.) Thanks! kmccoy (talk) 02:05, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Transwikiing

Heya, good job on the Transwikiing. ! --fvw * 06:29, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)

Horst Wessel Lied

This is not a candidate for speedy deletion; by any standard it is encyclopedic. At the very least, you should call for a VfD, but there is little chance it would succeed. Whether the lyrics should be included is a separate issue. -- Curps 20:08, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Just following the transwiki process. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 02:08, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Cleanup

'Should I go ahead and set up the new cleanup page?'

Sure. I was mostly holding off because I was still in the process of integrating the other items in the "Existing templates" section on the talk page. (Well, I'm not exactly in the middle of it any more - some other projects have my attention for the moment.) If you want to do that, I guess I've set a clear pattern. If you want to just go ahead and move the "new front page" to the actual front page, that's fine by me. Maybe it will spur more people to help finish it. I guess this makes a lot of the text on the talk page obsolete, so it will need archiving as well. ::sigh::

Thanks,

Beland 08:17, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Adminship

I know you work in good faith, Peter, but you seem to have a poor grasp of the policies for both deletion and, particularly, speedy deletion. I couldn't support an admin who either won't abide by or doesn't know those policies, and, what's worse, does so with the use of automation. It is not your current script that worries me so much as what you might write to aid you in ridding Wikipedia of articles you don't think it should have. I'd be willing to change my mind if you promised not to use your admin abilities to either a/ speedy delete articles or b/ delete articles from VfD unless there was unanimity for their deletion, and of course I would change it if your contributions start to show a better grasp of what should be deleted. Dr Zen 01:49, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Okay, though I'm not so malicious to want to "rid Wikipedia of articles I don't think it should have". One should look at my edit history to see what articles I have handled with a VfD consensus to keep, to see that I am not blind to VFD consensus. Peter O. (Talk, automation script) 02:06, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

I don't think it's "malicious" to want to restrict Wikipedia! As I said, I feel you are pursuing what you believe is the right goal in good faith.Dr Zen 02:31, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

images

You asked for info on three images. image:Lammer.JPG is definitely PD and tagged as such, can't see why there is a problem. Image:lappetvult.jpg I gave all the info I have, and I've expanded image:africandarter345afbirds.jpg. You will have to decide whether to tag or delete those. jimfbleak 06:32, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Scripts and bots

So, I'm curious, what is the reason for categorizing your script thing as a bot? I read the page you referenced (WP:Bots or some such), but it didn't seem to me like it qualified. Noel (talk) 21:45, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I know - I was dropping him a note on another subject, and I ran across your note to him, where you said:

It now came to my attention that my "script" qualified as a "bot" by the definition of Wikipedia:Bots.

which made it sound like you agreed that it was a bot. That's why I asked you... Noel (talk) 22:01, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

admin

if you ran the bot through a different username, still attributed to yourself, i may reconsider. Xtra 01:17, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You asked me about the status of some pictures: Image:Dompedro-II.jpg, Image:Dpedro2.png, Image:Dompedro-grant.jpg and Image:Dom-pedro-ii-family-b.jpg, Image:Dpedro1.png.

These pictures, which are historical documents, you can find in museums in Brazil(some of them-including the exposition- can be find even in internet). The pictures are very old and I think they are at public domain. Also I have seen them in a lot of places and books and I have seen nothing saying they are copywrited.

Pictures status

You asked me about the status of some pictures: Image:Dompedro-II.jpg, Image:Dpedro2.png, Image:Dompedro-grant.jpg and Image:Dom-pedro-ii-family-b.jpg, Image:Dpedro1.png.

These pictures, which are historical documents, you can find in museums in Brazil(some of them-including the exposition- can be find even in internet). The pictures are very old and I think they are at public domain. Also I have seen them in a lot of places and books and I have seen nothing saying they are copywrited.

CSS error

Hey, I was looking at your skin CSS file User:poccil/myskin.css to get some ideas for my wiki skinning, and noticed a minor mistake:

div, p, li, td, input { font-family: Pokemon RS, Lucida Sans Unicode, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif !important; }

You are specifying some fonts with spaces in the name, so you should quote these: "Font family names containing whitespace should be quoted. If quoting is omitted, any whitespace characters before and after the font name are ignored and any sequence of whitespace characters inside the font name is converted to a single space." In essence, this means you are asking for the fonts PokemonRS and LucidaSansUnicode, which probably don't exist. You should change the string as follows:

div, p, li, td, input { font-family: 'Pokemon RS', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, Arial, sans-serif !important; }

hth, Jordi·✆ 08:34, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

msg

Done. Sorry, I don't speak English :( - Twice25

Edit summary

Please comment at Wikipedia talk:Edit summary. Thanks. Hyacinth 01:08, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What's up with Sandnes.png

You added a {{unknown}} tag to Image:Sandnes.png, despite this image being clearly marked with a {{coatofarms}} tag, which explains the concept. The monicipality coat of arms is owned by the municipality, but we are pretty clear that we can apply fair use when using them for articles about the repective municipalities. Egil 11:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Larry David image

Know nothing about licensing images, fair use etc. However, the person who uploaded seems strangely reticent about the image. It would be a shame to lose the picture, what can be done?

Thanks --Mrfixter 02:31, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gcr.jpg

You removed this image from the article Gian-Carlo Rota, and you say that you will delete this image. Have you communicated with Daniel Klain about this? He explicitly gave me permission to put this image on Wikipedia. Michael Hardy 01:05, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)