User:AzaToth/Archive 4

Your request for adminship
It is with regret that I have to inform you that your request for adminship was unsuccessful on this occasion. Keep up the good work, and I look forward to seeing a nomination with your name on it again in the future. -- Francs2000 23:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

About your RFA
I sorry (and disturbed) to hear you didn't make it. Your work on meta templates is merit enough for you to have atleast admin privillages. Its sad to see users who don't make exceptions about main-space edit counts. --h y dkat 09:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the moral support :) → A z a  Toth 09:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you know my opinion. Expect a renomination from me in the not too distant future. :-) —Doug Bell talk•contrib 09:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Seconded, it's silly. Interiot's tool is the tool of the devil! What you need to do is go to WP:STUB, sort 500 stubs, and reapply. Or try WP:CAT, WP:WIKIFY, WP:AR1, or Maintenance. There's plenty of ways to ramp up the article-space edits. You weren't a cookie-cutter candidate, and unfortunately a few people didn't understand that. Reapply in exactly a month.   Proto    ||    type    09:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think exactly one month is a bad idea, some people see that as impatient. I would suggest you wait at least six-eight weeks, and check out WP:DPL and related pages for easy ways to get another 500-1000 mainspace edits to satisfy people suffering from editcountitis. It's a bit silly that you have to do this to become an admin, of course. Kusma (討論) 14:24, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * mmm...Editing articles of your general scope of interest may be a good start. "Random article" can be sometimes fun. ;) - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to hear you didn't make it... Interesting to compare your edit count with Essjay's for example. You two have a comparable deal of article edits to edits total (~1/12). The difference here is that Essjay is an admin and is currently running for B'cracy. Heck, even I have twice as many article edits and am still a regular user. You have unfortunately fallen victim to editcountitis. Oh, well... Good luck next time! You'll still have my support. Misza 13 T C 11:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As for articles you can edit, SuggestBot can help that.--HereToHelp 11:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If you want to you can help read over some of my geography articles and edit some here and there (there's always something that can be bettered in language). Or you can help me link them to navigation templates.  :)  That gives you a mainspace edit for each page you add that  to, and doesn't require a whole lot of expertise in that particular area.  (now you know how I pass my time around here).  And I'll second Doug's nomination when it comes in a heartbeat.  --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]] 12:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Second earlier comments that you should have won. As for suggested mainspace edits, certain classes of articles are easier to do than others. For example, there are a very large number of historical political figures who everyone agrees are important enough to have articles on but there are articles are either non-existent or very stubby. A large number of these could easily be dealt with simply by someone with the time and patience to google search for relevant info. A good list to maybe start on might be Governors of Rhode Island. Something that may be closer your area of interest since you are a comp sci person, a lot of the algorithmic number theory articles are stubby or nonexistent and so would also be highly useful (and in your case possibly more interesting). A third possibility is to put some articles that are frequently vandalized on your watchlist and just keep an eye for vandalism. The fact that we need to talk about essentially stupid ways to rack up mainspace edits is highly not a credit to what happened in your RfA. Better luck next time. JoshuaZ 13:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I've got Requests for adminship/AzaToth 2 on my watchlist already, so I'll know as soon as it's created! -- stillnotelf   is invisible  14:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I am disappointed that you failed in your RFA. I hope you try again in about one month's time. You will always have my support! -- S iva1979 Talk to me  14:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I too am sad to hear that your RfA failed - not all admins should be clones of each other and you have suffered from a narrow editcountitis viewpoint. You have some valuable suggestions above for articles that you could work on, not much more I can add, other than to say I see you are from Sweden and studying Computer Enginering. Might be worth considering adding to articles related to Sweden and in your field of study. Anyway, when you run again you'll have my support again. Best wishes. -- Cactus.man  &#9997;  14:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry you didn't make it too. Your work here is commendable. But anyway, these things happen, best of luck should you run again in the future! - W e zzo (talk) (ubx) 15:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's a symptom of how busy WP has become that editors don't feel they have the time to look at edit quality, but just make a quick judgment (much like what goes on with AfD votes, and I'm guilty of that too). Templates are just as important as articles on WP because they improve productivity for everyone, IMHO. Good luck next time. Slowmover 16:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Please do not weep - you shall make it next time - life is dynamic. And, I know you are a bold and nice person. --Bhadani 16:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Best wishes. Count on my support next time. BTW, yet another avenue for satisfying the editcountitis afflicted - the holding cell for templates. There are often templates transcluded on dozens of pages which need to be switched over to a new template, subst'd, or otherwise adjusted in the actual main space articles. --CBDunkerson 16:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Good luck next time! Jayjg (talk) 19:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to hear it didn't pass. I am hereby exempting you from any Do Not Call Registry that I may devise in relation to such things; I don't always watch RfA reliably, so if you get renominated, drop me a line and I will support again - assuming you haven't gone completely batshit insane in the meantime, of course. Good luck! -- nae'blis (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

You have my condolences. Do be sure to drop me a line in a couple months, though, and I'll support you again. Now, go out and make a better encyclopedia. :) Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk? ) 01:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me know when you have your next nomination, I'll vote for you too.--Anchoress 01:00, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

My thoughts
Sorry about the Rfa...but there will be another chance later. Concentrate more on admin stuff, do some RC patrol, participate in some of the comments boards in Wikipedia administrators areas and vote on some Afd's etc., and you'll do fine next time.--MONGO 05:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Nomination
I am sorry to hear you didnt make it. I'm sure next time you try out, you'll get it. Let me know next time your nominated. All the best! Tutmosis 22:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Bureaucrats
It would be great if you could check out and comment on the proposal for clearer language in the process description for RfAs that I posted there. Thanks. --Mmounties ( Talk )  02:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * hehehe, you lost me there.... and I suspect a bunch of others too. It may be correct, but I'm not sure anyone understands it. Would you agree to just change it to (# supporting divided by (# of supporting + # of opposing)?  --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]] 05:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I wrote mathematically correct (I think), so it's the only language we can assume everyone here understand, even from what part of the world they are from :) → A z a  Toth 05:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the new formula is perfect. Nobody can claim it is insulting anybody's intelligence now. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 05:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I really like both of your senses of humor, you know. Except I have a little problem because I can bet you some goodies that it ain't going to pass like this.  Please help me find something that will not confuse those who forgot most of their high school math, never mind what they learned in college.  Pretty please???  --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]] 06:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Nah, we must be correct here :) I jst got an idea that strong or weak votes should cont different, so: $$

x = \frac{\sum v_{support_{weak}} \cdot 0.5 + \sum v_{support_{normal}} + \sum v_{support_{strong}} \cdot 1.5}{\sum v_{support_{weak}} \cdot 0.5 + \sum v_{support_{normal}} + \sum v_{support_{strong}} \cdot 1.5 + \sum v_{oppose_{weak}} \cdot 0.5 + \sum v_{oppose_{normal}} + \sum v_{oppose_{strong}} \cdot 1.5} $$ → A z a  Toth 06:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * HAHAHA!!! ...alright. I'll agree to almost any formula as long as you keep it here.  I certainly couldn't prove you wrong no matter how hard I tried.  My years in school are way too far removed for that.  :(  Just so you're not surprised, I did just change the one on the other page back so that all those who look at it don't think I'm absolutely nuts for even suggesting that's clearer than what's there without any formula, and so that the modifications stand a fighting chance in hell of passing.  (though I gladly admitted in my edit summary that the formula may not be all-encompassing). --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]]
 * Ahhh. You're the best!  Now I can retire into the horizontal in peace.  [[Image:Smiley.png|20px]]  --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]] 07:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Aza, I must thank you. This is the first time I've been able to laugh at anything since getting hammered over my inclusion of the formula on that page.  I truly appreciate it. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 07:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Your RFA
Hey sorry again about your RFA. I think anything over 70 percent deserves admin rights. Better luck next time. Keep me in mind, you've got my vote.

mm e  inhart ''' 18:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep editing positively and you will still have my supporting vote next time. Do not feel discouraged.--Jusjih 08:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't usually trawl RfA, so generally am unaware of Nominations, however if you reapply, please let me know and you will have my support. The idea that you have to edit only in the main namespace, even though your work on templates means you have indirectly improved many thousands of articles is insane. Mr Weeble Talk Brit tv 13:37, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Please drop me a note too if you reapply. BTW my new name is not an april day joke. --Ligulem 18:07, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll be giving you a support vote on your next RfA. If I was paying more attention to the RfAs at the time, I would certainly have given a support vote. Better luck next time! DarthVader 14:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

NOINCLUDE/INCLUDEONLY trick
I seem to recall it being possible to get  to be transcluded when SUBST'ing a template. In other words: I have template T1, and I want the includeonly tag to be subst'd into the destination, D1 (so when D1 is further transcluded into D2, the content will be visible there, but not in D1). Is that still possible? If so, how is it done? =) —Locke Cole • t • c 00:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Got it I think. =) ? (seems to work) =) —Locke Cole • t • c 00:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I havn't tested, that depends I think on when it interpret includeonly, and how many times. Theoretically it could work, but I havn't tested it :) → A z a  Toth 02:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want to see it working (at least, seemingly, heh), check out User:Locke Cole/Template:RfA (then see the talk page for a subst'd copy of it, and finally see User:Locke Cole/Requests for adminship for the subst'd copy being transcluded). Oh, and you might find the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship interesting if you found any of the rest interesting. But basically, some people think it might be nice to clean up the main RfA page so it's not so huge anymore. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 02:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Your rfa and Main namespace
Hi, sorry to see what happened - I wasn't around to notice your rfa. I think edits to main namespace would keep you in good stead. You may want to use this bot for suggestions to edit in the main namespace. --Gurubrahma 17:35, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * This header seems appropriate enough. Although I'm template challenged, I've recently become interested in the finer points of templates. Your work in the template namespace is beyond clever. I came here to make that comment and only then realized what had happened with your RfA. Given the nature of your main contributions here, I think that you should be an admin so as to make your workplace more convenient for you. I'll be watching for your next nomination and you will have my vote.  hydnjo talk 01:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

copyvio tag on IEEE floating-point standard
IANAL either, but what about the page do you think is a copyright vio? I don't see anything lifted directly from the IEEE standards...are you saying that including a description of the technical details of the standard in any form is a copyright violation? —Doug Bell talk•contrib 21:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't have any access to ieee materials, but per their web-page, they seems to care alot about copyright an ip:s. → A z a  Toth 22:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh I agree, they are protective of their IP, I just don't know if the current discussion infringes on that or not. I wanted to know if you had a particular insight into where the current article might be infringing.  Since the article doesn't use abstracts or full-text, the issue would be one of protection of the technical details, rather than the expression of the content.  Probably ought to move this discussion to the talk page... —Doug Bell talk•contrib 22:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed the copyvio tag. BrokenSegue 22:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, understand. → A z a  Toth 22:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, well at least you got credit for a main space edit. ;-) —Doug Bell talk•contrib 23:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * funny...... :) → A z a  Toth 23:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi
... how've you been? If you haven't gotten started on getting those main space edits yet, I found the perfect place for you to get them this past weekend. Check out Disambiguation pages with links. It's easy and you can get 200 easily in a day. Lots of bang for your buck! :) Hope all is well.  --Mmounties ( Talk )   22:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Your user talk page
(This should go on User talk talk:AzaToth but I don't know if you read that ;-))

Your user talk page breaks in Mozilla 1.7.5 at all widths above approx. 600. The table of contents and the Esperanza newsletter partially overlap, creating an unreadable mess. I don't know if this is due to a bug in TOCright, the Esperanza newsletter, or Mozilla, though. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 22:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I know that the Esperanza newletter overlap, I think it's because it's 100% wide, I'll remove it :) → A z a  Toth 22:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Image
Your image edits are really ing ;-) NoSeptember   talk  23:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * hehe :) → A z a  Toth 02:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Vkasdg
Having read your commentary I wasn't sure if you saw the details of the personal attack committed by that editor but he seriously warrants an outright block with all of those violations. I realize you're not in a position to do that but you might want to adjust your commentary. Netscott 03:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I only checked about the vandalism on jyllandsporten page, I didn't thought about anything else at that time, I'll read again to see. → A z a  Toth 03:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen...?
ParserFunctions? —Locke Cole • t • c 22:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Good Job
Could you comment on Template talk:Good Job? Thanks, TheJabberwock 03:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Tempalte:coffee-mug-pokemon-bio-stub
Hi AzaToth - it's not like you to make speediable patent nonsense like this... It's not a good look for someone who's recently tried for RFA - it's the sort of thing that might count against you if you try it again. What's up? Grutness...wha?  00:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, we had a talk on #wikipedia, and I just for fun created them, there where made only to exist for som minutes :) → A z a  Toth 01:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That's a relief. Thought it would be something like that (though you were a few days late for April fools day...) Glad you haven't gone over to the Dark Side :) Grutness...wha?  05:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Kol HaCampus
This article had been prodded for 4 days and was about to be deleted, was it really worth adding it to the backlog at WP:CV? Just let nature take its course...  Dei zio  00:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't see that, sorry. → A z a  Toth 00:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Earth
I'm NOT vandalizing the Earth Article. The picture is a VERY poor quaility animated GIF without a caption. Wikipedia should stand for HIGHER quality. That gif should be removed.....what does it show? 138.163.0.42 00:33, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Removing of images without edit-summary is easly thought of as vandalism. but ok, that image is ugly. I've made two others, one big and the other smaller, the smaller on is [[Image:Rotating globe-small.gif]], the bigger one is Image:Rotating globe.gif. → A z a  Toth 00:40, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

wikify
Hi, I am an occasional worker to help with the backlog to Category:Articles that need to be wikified. I ran across the article Campinas, which you added a wikify tag to. I don't understand why you added it. With a backlog to wikify perhaps we should reserve the tag for article that are almost pure unformatted text. If you respond, please do so on my talk page. Jon513 11:07, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, it was because the history section is using plain html (upper case also ugh), therefor I added wikify-tag there. → A z a  Toth 11:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey Wow!
Thanks for creating a ribbon for my favorite barnstar/award! Peace, Kukini 18:24, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Reporting barnstars at Esperanza/Barnstar Brigade
Hi AzaToth,

It was discussed at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Barnstar Brigade that the reporting section of the Barnstar Brigade was to be cleared every week so that the page does not become immensly long, while still being able to have the barnstars awarded reported. If you'd like to have the section removed, please bring it up for discussion on the talk page. Thanks, -- Nataly a 17:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * A quick word on this...I personally wish things were being archived instead of cleared. I will keep on awarding, but not so sure about putting the ribbon on the page only to be deleted a day or two later. Kukini 03:22, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Aircraft
Aza - I have a favor to ask of you. Can you work with me to update Infobox Aircraft? The template is way to generic and is not being used by any articles. I think this is a prime candidate for creating a detailed infobox. Ideally it would be flexible for both civilian and military aircraft - see (Boeing 737, Pipers, F-15, [C-130 Hercules]] B-2 Spirit. I have left a message about my suggestion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft.  Sorry for the spam appeal for help.  Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)&bull; 14:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

ribbon
Hey Aza,

I seem to have a problem with ribbon. I wanted to make all the entries in the WP:BSB templatified (so to speak), but they wouldnt work. I assume it has something to do with the piping character ( | ), but dont know exactly what. Could you take a look?

Cheers, The Minist   e   r of War   (Peace) 09:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I have (partly) tracked down what the problem is. It has to do with pipe characters in sigs. This means that ribbon is not compatible with most people's sigs :-( Maybe there is a way around it, but i'm not good enough in code to tell. What I do know is that if you do it doesnt seem to work. It does work when you type  . Odd isnt it? Also, EWS23's sig (on WP:BSB) has a pipe character outside of Wikibrackets. This sig only works if you put that pipe character in between "nowiki" (as I have done on that page).
 * It would be great if we could fix it. Otherwise it will probably prove too unwieldy for most people, having to correct their own sigs constantly. Any ideas? The Minist   e   r of War   (Peace) 12:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I was hypocritical?
You said you found my comments to Patrick on his talk page hypocritical, and on the talk page, I asked you why. I figured I should ask here. I am interested to know why you thought my comments were hypocritical. This is in reference to what I said to him about combining edits, under the heading "Combining edits." Stiles 16:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It was because you had made more reecent edits in a row on said page that him. → A z a  Toth 17:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


 * That is because I contributed a lot more than he did, with all due respect to him. Occasionally, I do save simply because I am afraid the browser will do something and that everything would be lost. Stiles 19:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Template functions
Just bringing to your attention conversion templates and specifically a note on the talk page suggesting that we standardize on a naming convention for future template functions. I'll be passing this note along to CBDunkerson and Ligulem; feel free to post it/mention it anywhere else you think it would help to raise awareness and avoid the duplication of work. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 01:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the motivation award ribbon.Rosa 00:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

hidden template customization inquiry
Hi, I'm part of the redesign crew for the Community Portal. We're trying to work out possible options for making everyone happy with what appears at the top of the page. (some want the Bulletin board, others want the traditional Things to do/Open tasks lists).

We're wondering if the hidden template's functionality could be especially copied & adapted for use on the CP? (both whether it's allowable by policy, and whether someone could assist in the coding of it for us).

I've put hiddenbegin/end templates in on the draft page as a demonstration. I think all we'd need changed would be to remove the stylings (small fonts, centering)?

If that is all possible, there are further questions/proposals, but i'll leave that till after a yay/nay ;)

Much, thanks. --Quiddity 04:04, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Ideally, it would act like the ToC hide function, with the section being visible by default, but remembering if you have clicked "hide" previously. (I tried to hack the ToC css classes in, but couldnt figure out the javascript hide-link..) --Quiddity 21:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Try to do it manually, but remove one ... → A z  a  Toth 21:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Think i've got it. Much thanks :) --Quiddity 22:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Qif template
Despite people who continue to denigrate the qif template because of the anti-meta template hysteria, you deserve kudos for having created a motivation to implement the ParserFunctions. Without Qif, we probably wouldn't have gotten them. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 07:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Absolutely agree, qif was a very good thing (  ). =) —Locke Cole • t • c 07:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Template:Airtemp
Was wondering if you might have any idea why the #switch in wasn't working correctly? (You can see the original code in the history, or look at ). This might be something we need Tim to fix if it's not any sort of template coding error. —Locke Cole • t • c 07:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you atre using switch wrong → A z a  Toth 18:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * *groan* probably from reading/suggesting those minor variations of #switch on Meta. :P —Locke Cole • t • c 18:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

AzaToth, question about your swapping of  for   in the template without any styling info - these tags (as used without closing   - a second   instead) don't show content in the TOC or with [Edit] tags. What's the problem with this type of header in a template? Can you point out what policy this violates or where it's explained? ericg &#9992; 22:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Before I have seen problems with using h1...h6 in templates because they render as ordinary headers and thus lists as a section, this might have been fixed, I'm sorry if you got upset. → A z a  Toth 22:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Reply
I am most definitely not a member of wikitruth.info, why did you think I was? — Apr. 20, '06 [17:47] <[ freakofnurxture]|[ talk]>
 * Because if this: http://wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Image:7312_deleted_edits.png, that's why I ask, otherwise someone is impersonate you. → A z a  Toth 18:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That's from here: Image:7312_deleted_edits.png. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... I don't think they are actively trying to impersonate me, but they are violating the GFDL, I think. I would register an account there right now, just to prevent somebody else from impersonating me, but this page does not appear to permit it. — Apr. 20, '06 [19:08] <[ freakofnurxture]|[ talk]>
 * Bleh, I tried to copy the signup FORM code from here (but changed the URLs to wikitruth.info, etc) but it gave me a permission error when signing up. Seems they have new account creation permissions limited. Bleh. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Question
Not sure if this is the right place to ask but may be worth a try.

There is a screenshot credited to you of some source code with syntax highlighting, black background, bright foreground colours, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Html-source-code.png

Just wondering, which (if any) text/source code editor is it from? Is the editor available to the public? Please let me know if you can (if you don't want to disclose it no worries). You can email me at   idhasbiatp (at) yahoo.co.uk

Thanks for your time :)

Pedro

ps hardly needs saying but feel free to edit this messsage out later if you don't want it
 * It's just vim :) → A z a  Toth 11:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox_Aircraft
Thank you for your work on it, but Infoboxes have been heavily discussed and rejected by Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft. A few users have ignited a rediscussion of it but so far the consensus has not been overturned. Please participate there before implementing any drastic changes. --Mmx1 21:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Image sizebug.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Image sizebug.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 05:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Cel es tianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Aircraft infobox
The current state of the aircraft infobox is actually very nice. Congratulations on doing such a great job with it!!! We'll do a poll on WP:Air and if it passes I'll include it in my AWB task-o-rama (yes, I will support it now). - Emt147 Burninate!  17:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I started a consensus discussion on adopting your and Eric's infobox on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft. Please voice your opinion! - Emt147 Burninate!  17:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The consensus is pretty overwhelming in favor of adopting the infobox. Congratulations! You and ericg did a fantastic job! - Emt147 Burninate!  17:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Adminship
Hey, when you want to run again for adminship let me know. I'd like to nominate you. JoshuaZ 02:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sometime in the future I think (right now I think is to early) → A z a  Toth 14:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Re the whole de-bureaucrating thing
Hi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Fr a ncs2000 09:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Template:Infobox Irish University
I have allready discussed this issue with User: Reflex Reaction, i am do not accempt this as it nothing more then cabalist and back-door, so if th tage is placed i'll remove it, as the "discusson" was invalad. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not cabalistic or backdoorish, There has always been consensus to replace country-specific infoboxes with the generic one, and most have been replaced by now, only a couple left. There has never been any reason for extensive discussion because there has been consensus,l and repeat the discussion would been a waste of time. But if you have any objection to deprecate said infobox, please express your consern on . → A z a  Toth 05:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Aza, while this was never cabalist or backdoorish, if Boothy would like a larger discussion about whether to keep the template, I don't see a big problem with that. I'm working on depopulating items from other countries Template_talk:Infobox_University and will do Irish Universities last. When I get around to the Irish Universities, I'll inform the WP:IWNB and get this thing done. I think most people will agree including Boothy that it's doesn't make sense to keep a separate infobox. Thanks! -- Reflex Reaction  ( talk )&bull; 18:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: About Template:Infobox University
I added the "logo" parameter because "image" is usually used for schools' official seals, but I didn't find a parameter that is suitable to place a logo image into.
 * Aha, I see, no problem them :). → A z a  Toth 19:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

AzaBot
Hold off on that Airtemp subst'ing. I think the template is being renamed to "Aircraft specifications (plural and less awkward-sounding). - Emt147 Burninate!  02:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * ok. → A z a  Toth 02:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've performed the page move. Feel free to resume your activities, but move to  (plural) instead.  Thanks for the help.  Ingoolemo talk 02:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll do that. → A z a  Toth 14:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Jessica LeCroy
I'm not offended, but you really didn't do your homework before tagging this article as a hoax and copyvio. See Talk:Jessica LeCroy. I understand at each stage how you made your mistake: the link no longer points to what it once did, and then you found the same text used on a non-U.S. government page. However, you ought to have considered that perhaps a conscientious editor would have explicitly written the source in the opening entry (since, as it happens, I did). Now I'll assume that you didn't see that and conclude that I was lying, because I've been here long enough that it's not terribly plausible, but if a newbie had created the article in the same way I did, you would have just bitten him or her severely. You ought to have either looked around more carefully, used the talk page before putting up all those tags, or both. Can you try to be more careful in the future? -- SCZenz 03:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I falgges it as copyvio because the sentence "LeCroy, a career foreign-service officer, arrived in Toronto as consul general in September 2004 after serving outside the Department of State for two years as national security adviser to the U.S. secretary of the treasury, and a year in Baghdad as executive assistant to the administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) and director of the CPA executive secretariat." and that page defined "Copyright © 2004 Niagara University" and no other copyleft notices. In that sense I feel it's a copyvio. → A z  a  Toth 04:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears that the Niagra University website has a copy of the original biography from the Consulate website. My point is that I clearly indicated I got it from the Consul General's website, and you didn't either didn't notice or ignored this point. -- SCZenz 05:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * When I was marking it as possible copyvio, I checked up the source as specified in the history, but that page didn't exist or was moved so I couldn't verify it, I then found it on the niagra univ website, and based on only that information I assumed it was a copyvio. I would hopy you could assume good faith in this matter and see that in my point of view the relevant data för defining it as a PD-source was not found. Could you point me to the website that have this infomration in PD? → A z a  Toth 06:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I cannot, as I have already explained. The text was available in the public domain in the past, but it would appear that it no longer is; this does not change the appropriateness of including it.  I was assuming good faith to this point, but you now seem to be asserting that if an external website no longer says what it said when I accessed it, it is acceptable to assume I was lying.  I do not believe that is correct, and most especially you shouldn't have made such assumptions without so much as sending me a message. -- SCZenz 06:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I was talking about the past, not the present, also I would like you to voice down a bit, I perhaps should sent you a message when I flagged the article, but now I didn't, but done is done. → A z a  Toth 06:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I apologize, but it wasn't clear when you were talking about. After all, you just stated (in your last message before this one) that you already knew what I said the source was, but tagged it as a copyvio anyway&mdash;I don't see how that amounts to anything less than assertion that I lied in my edit summary.  You also requested (in the same message) that I provide a link to a PD version, which implied that you remained presently interested in proof.  But if you're satisfied that things are ok now, I don't see any need to pursue the argument further.  However, I request that you consider in the future that accusing a user who has stated his source of copyright infringement is not less uncivil because you have a big standardized template to do it with. -- SCZenz 06:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Wr template
Bugging you about this since you seem to be the template person. The template seems to not be able to be substituted. Is there a policy reason for this? If not, is there a way to get it to work? JoshuaZ 14:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * As it looks like, it would be no problem, I'll try here: Please do not remove warnings from your talk page or replace them with offensive content. Blanking your talk page will not remove the warnings from the page history. If you continue to blank your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. → A z  a  Toth 15:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It works, → A z a  Toth 15:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Template:Koreanname help
Hey Aza, could you do a "Usage" section for the Koreanname template that is similar to Template_talk:Infobox_University? I'm having a bit of trouble converting the Korean University infoboxes over. Thanks! -- Reflex Reaction  ( talk )&bull; 19:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Info Box
Hi there Aza Toth, Please update me on the 'language info box' saga on the Scanian (linguistics) article when you get a chance. Is there a policy that forbids you to put a box there or is the reason simply that a group of fanatics is blocking even such a simple thing because they feel it would lend too much credibilty and status to Scanian? I saw your impressive list of programming skills..please tell me that you haven't given up on that page and that you'll put something fabulous there eventually. ;) Best wishes, Pia 07:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem seems that there are no consensus that defines scanian as a language, and some agreee that it's only a dialect. I don't want to ccomment on that matter, because I realy don't know how to define a language. → A z a  Toth 17:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but being a neutral, non POV-influenced encyclopedia type publication relying on SIL for information for the boxes on the language pages, it would seem to me that consensus between contributors is not really the issue here. W. is not a policy maker on how to make the distinction in complicated issues like "what is a language". It is SIL who is supplying the info used in all the other language boxes on Wikipedia.  And in the case of skånska, the organization has spoken: Yes, it's a language, and the language ISO code for this particular language is such and such. What I see here is not a demand for consensus on Scanian (which is out of bounds) but a demand for consensus on whether or not SIL is reliable and can be used in the Scanian case. It's a totally abritary call, unless there is a demand that all other boxes on other language pages are scrutinized as well so that we can have polls and reach consensus about SIL in each individual case. Notice that the Swedish side for skånska has the box, see . What I'm wondering is if it is correct to argue that the box is exclusively for state endorsed languages, like some has here, in line with the old saying:  "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy." - See North Germanic languages, where they actually use this phrase about Sweden and Denmark. I noticed that several dialects or languages which no longer exsist have pages with boxes on wikipedia, with 0 in the number of speakers. Where is the box police? Can we please send him on a goose hunt to fix those. ;) Not to burden you, I just wanted to touch base with you, because you asked the same question on the discussion page that was on my mind, and I wondered if you got a satisfying answer. I don't have time right now, but I will deal with this later, because I don't believe that people anywhere are speaking "linguistics" . Imagine this, Q: "Pia, I heard that the linguistics spoken in Skåne has changed through time, so do you speak the same linguistics as your ancestors or is it a new linguistics?" A: "ah, well, the root is the same, all Scandinavian languages are from the same language tree to begin with, but then they developed into different branches and ours developed into a linguistics branch while the other developed into real languages. Then our linguistics branch became Danish and lately it has become so Swedified that it doesn't even really exist as a linguistics anymore, even though old people out in small isolated villages still seem to think they speak it.But as we all know, their real problem is just that they haven't been able to drop that ugly Danish accent yet." He, he. Later, 71.106.236.178 01:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, that's me, got logged out so you only got my number. Sorry, Pia 01:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Can't help myself
Pluck the day(literal)/Seize the day(actual), believing as little as possible in the next(literal)/ trust no tomorrows(actual). Sorry for wasting your time. :) --h y dka t 09:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Baphomet-sigil.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Baphomet-sigil.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Durin 19:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ribbon
¡Hola! I like the ribbons you have created very much and since I don't know how to create ribbons by myself, I was wondering if you could create a ribbon for a personal user award I created, the IL Divo Star. If it's not too much trouble, could you make it with the following color scheme please? Like the Tournesol ribbon you created for the Wikithanks but black instead of yellow, hot pink instead of orange and goldenrod instead of green. Thanks, Rosa 01:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok: [[Image:Il Divo Star.png|120px]] → A z a  Toth 12:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

¡Gracias!
Since I received the barnstar for creating it, it's just appropriate that you receive it too for creating the ribbon :)Rosa</b> 08:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update
As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:User wikipedia/Administrator
Template:User wikipedia/Administrator has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Matthew <b style="color:#3366ff;"> Fenton (</b> contribs <b style="color:#3366ff;">)</b> 23:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia awards committee
Check out my comments here, Wikipedia awards committee. Thanks! --evrik 17:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Really like your Work
I really admire the ribbons you created, I was wondering if you could propose and create ribbons for these three awards. I liken the ribbons to the Military, the Military has special additions to a ribbon if it is awarded more than once. See Award numerals I was wondering if you could propose and add numbers to some of more common awarded Barnstars? I suck at graphics, that is why I am asking you. :) Pete Peters 20:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I can see what I can do, have had some stuff to do latly :) → A z a  Toth 18:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Nested wikitables
Whatever happened with this? — Omegatron 14:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Enhancement
I was wondering if you could enhance Image:Counter Vandalism Unit-en.png a bit like Image:CTU-Logo.png. I like those white circles that seperate the disks. :)

Further enhancement is also welcome (text looks too simple and bottom filed needs some text)

-- Cat out 09:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Think the text is ok, feel that it shouldn't be to elaborated text-style, simple is best in this example. Here I've made a new version thou. → A z a  Toth 20:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Clenaup
I saw an old message you posted asking about what articles in main space needed work. Category:Cleanup by month is backlogged if you are still interested. RJFJR 17:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Template:RfA/Stat
That's a rather interesting template. I think the format needs some tweaking, and I also think it might be a good idea to run this past WT:RFA to see what people think before we apply it to all future RfAs. On the format, rather than
 * (S:41[83.67%]•O:8[16.33%]•N:1)

how about
 * (Sup:41 / Opp:8 / Neu:1)[83.67%].

As it is now, it's fairly cramped text and difficult to visually parse. --Durin 14:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Could be a good idea. → A z a  Toth 17:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Economy of Russia copyright violation tag.
Hello. You have been recently tagged Economy of Russia article with possible copyright violation. But a comment to the edit from 6 july 2004 that has been done by user 172 says that text is in PD. Please follow  or  (depend on how quick this discussion will be moved to usual page) to clarify the situation. Elk Salmon 15:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Your recent "test" in Template:Album
Hehehe :) Actually, the code was mildly right. The color template should return nothing (that is, no value) if it is not a valid type, thus even if there is a Type argument, if it is invalid it should fall back to the Background color. However, that idea was an old one, which I had already dismissed it (right now, it is falling back to gainsboro, but it is likely to end with another color like pink). The Background color should be completely dropped, and a category be implemented for those albums with non-standard types. Anyways, thanks for the tip :) -- ReyBrujo 02:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the old code to fall back to the Background parameter if the type was not valid. I am trying to minimize the effect of the change, so instead of having 29,000 articles with errors (as my first test a month or so ago delivered), to have just a couple thousands. I will do some more tests before implementing the change again, though. -- ReyBrujo 02:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

To-do list
Noticed this on the top of the discussion page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums? I know we're allowed to do stuff other than obsess about song lengths, but how does it relate to Albums? :-) Fantailfan 13:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * At the moment, I really don't know, I must have put it on the wrong page, or I had a reason to put it there (thinking thinking) :/ → A z a  Toth 15:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

AegeanLinux article
How does it read like an advertisement?
 * Mostly because of the wording used in the article. → A z a  Toth 00:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

crosstar
Could you email Brad Patrick to ask about that? I am unsure of the current status. This should be fine to re-upload now, but let's make sure first.--Jimbo Wales 20:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No to this RfA reform
Hi,

You're a great guy, I supported your RfA the first time, and I will do so again; but, your idea for RfA reform makes b'crats into virtual gods regarding the process. I can't except that b'crat either desire, or are capable, of determining consensus in a forum regularly visited by 200 commenters/application (on a site with over 1.5 million users) without some kind of objective metric. I have added standard headings to your RfA, lest it degenerate into insanity. The b'crat corps are great folks, but admin promotion can't be based on solely their judgment -- belief in the cabal will skyrocket, b'crats will be harrassed no end, and trust in new admins will be much lower among our userbase. Best wishes, Xoloz 16:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You have a good point there, something I havn't though about earlier. The reason for the proposal, is that we would like a system that not exactly can be degenerated as an exact vote, by only counting numbers instead of looking up if the nominee is good for adminship. Now I see that radiant have changed back to how I had made it, so I ask him what to do, I really don't want an edit war about that now :) → A z a  Toth 16:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It really broke my heart that Radiant seems to have removed Support from my comment -- I consider that substantive, and I consider his removal it very impolite. I'm sorry, I have switched to Strong Oppose for now on account of the malformed RfA, but I look forward to supporting a regular request in the future. Xoloz 16:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA
Please take note that your RfA was removed from the WP:RFA page by MatthewFenton. If you would like to continue feel free to relist it but I would suggest you to make your RfA conform with the RfA template since many users are objecting because of the RfA being malformed. --16:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I was hopeing that people would be encouraged to only have a discusion, than just a vote, but that seems to be too much to be asked, I'll reformat the RfA according to the template, even if I feel that it's wrong to have a vote on the matter. → A z a  Toth 16:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Carl. I think it was a wise decision to withdraw. Nevertheless don't feel sad about it. It was a very nice try to give the new format a run, and it is very noble to try one's own proposal. It's like a doctor who tries his new pill on himself first :). I don't know of that man Wikipedians who would have the nerves to do such a thing. Let me know if you think about adminship again (probably before you create the nom :). You do have my trust for adminship. In German I would say: "Die Zeit ist noch nicht reif". It's not easy for Wiki-plumbers :). --Ligulem 17:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was feeling a bit scared, when I created the nomination, how people would react, but it went as it did :(, better luck I hope next time. → A z a  Toth 17:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me know if you decide to re-apply, I would nominate you if you wuld like. Rich Farmbrough, 16:44 30 September 2006 (GMT).
 * Thanks, that would be nice, I'll tell you when I'm ready :) → A z a  Toth 16:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Simple (I think!) help request
Hi AzaToth, Recalling your expertise in all things CSS, HTML and templatey, could you spare a moment to advise how I might reduce the gaps between the lines in this template...? I've tried various combinations of "height:" and "line-height:" but to no avail... Thanks, David Kernow (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That a difficult question, as I belive the template as it is is too big, the hide function wasn't ment to be used on templates in main namespace, I have thou one ide I'll implement soon, that I think is a better solution, but it will require changing the calls. → A z a  Toth 11:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks; I hope it isn't too difficult to allow line/row heights to be changed. I didn't realise the "Nav" s weren't intended for the main encyclopedia; I picked them up from a template I found there. Is there somewhere on Wikipedia where all these classes ("toccontents", "NavContent", "wikitable" etc etc) are listed and described...?  Thanks, David (talk) 13:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Found hell
(Cross posted) Dump search finished! List is at User:Ligulem/work/templates using hiddenStructure. I suggest we strike out entries that are cleaned-up. --Ligulem 12:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Understand → A z a  Toth 12:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: regarding warningmessage on User talk:68.100.230.189
Oh, huh. Didn't even notice that. Possibly a bug, since we were probably both trying to create a new page with the same title? Whatever happened, it wasn't intentional; apologies for the faux pas. Luna Santin 19:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem :) → A z a  Toth 19:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for helping out with Bonaparte today—I appreciate it. :-) &mdash; Khoikhoi 01:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

 * ) → A z a  Toth 12:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Cent
Hello, I see you've recently edited cent. This is quite all right and I encourage you to help keep it current. But please don't forget to log your changes at Centralized discussion/Template log. This will help us stay all on the same page -- no pun intended. Thank you. John Reid 16:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * For the record, I did. → A z a  Toth 17:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Officeholder
Thanks for moving the template. I've been arguing to have it moved for ages. Hera1187 05:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Country
Hi, Have you discussed the appearance change to the infobox on the talk page? Why did you change it? - Nick C 19:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * wasn't ment as a change of the appearance than to clean up the template, the only appearance change I did was the title, also rememober that you don't own the template, I'll redo my change, but won't change the title. → A z a  Toth 19:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I've eliminated some more redundancies by converting the template to use "infobox geography". We'll see if it sticks.  -- Rick Block (talk) 03:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

GA review
I move the detailed information from your review of Order theory to its talk page rather than the main WP:GAN page. The only thing that needs to be on the list is that fact that you put it on hold, the problems themselves should be put on the talk page where editors working on the article are more likely to see them. Eluchil404 22:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Aha, ok. → A z a  Toth 22:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Working Man's Barnstar and Barnstar of Diligence
Hi! evrik suggested I contact you since you're associated with WikiProject Awards. After some discussion about changing the name of the "Working Man's Barnstar" to something gender inclusive, we realized that there is not much distinction between "Working Man's Barnstar" and the "Barnstar of Diligence". In order to avoid an overly-PC rename of "Working Man's", and given that there's not much difference between the two anyway, I thought it'd be best to conflate the two awards and have only "The Barnstar of Diligence." Your opinion on the matter would be much appreciated! The discussion can be found here. Cheers! -- Merope Talk 17:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Multiple FARs
Hi, AzaToth, I just noticed you nominated two FARs back to back. Please remember that we try to work to improve the articles as they come up, and like to encourage the nominator to pitch in where possible as well&mdash;try not to overload us. Also, I don't notify Version 1.0 or Version 5.0, as they aren't going to help improve the articles, and they are ill-conceived projects, IMO. We notify projects so that they'll help improve and hopefully retain the featured status of the article. Our goal is to improve as many articles as we can, rather than just run them through. Thanks, Sandy 19:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That I understand, but as I read through the Emacs article, I felt that it wasn't FA quality, so I felt this one could have a review also, I coudln't just let it go. → A z a  Toth 19:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem: I just wanted to make sure you didn't plan on running about 30 more through today :-)  Sandy 19:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hehe, no way :) → A z a  Toth 19:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

integrated circuit cleanup notice
Please add constructive suggestions to the IC talk page. I await your response. --Ancheta Wis 23:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Lake Highland Preparatory School
Hey Aza, I've deleted the vandal edits as you requested on AN/I. Please double check I got exactly what you wanted. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 13:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Edit Summary - Cleanup
I'll admit it. I was using AutoWikiBrowser to check for spelling and cleanup. Normally the articles require a slight cleanup (eg. moving interwiki links to the end) as well as a spelling fix. In this case I forgot to change edit summary and left it as it had been for the previous article edit and AutoWikiBrowser put it in. My mistake. -- Mark S  (talk) 15:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Just a note to say "Thanks!" for your help in referncing articles. Good work! – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

HiddenStructure
Is there any way to find out all the pages that currently still include this thing? Since it was disabled, every template that used it is a huge mess (eg. Template:Infobox gridiron football person, pointed out in the village pump). - Bobet 16:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The list we are working on at the moment is located at: User:Ligulem/work/templates using hiddenStructure → A z a  Toth 16:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, it's good to know that they'll probably get fixed eventually :) But still, what a mess, it will take a while to fix that (i edited one and it took me 20 minutes, even though most of the fields were just copies from another one that already used ifs). Do you know why that thing was disabled before all of the templates were changed? Could someone be persuaded to change it back until it's been deprecated? - Bobet 17:20, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Because some people was starting using it on new templates. and it is a hell to find those templats as you need to make a database search first to find them (by downloading a database dump and searching using regexpes.) → A z a  Toth 17:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

LOL. -- Netoholic @ 17:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What? → A z a  Toth 17:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
No problem. I'm glad someone else remembers. Antandrus (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

GA review suggestion
This is largely in response to your review of computational phylogenetics - I don't want this to sound like "sour grapes", as you're right that the article is very dense and technical, and one reason I nominated it was to get feedback on its accessibility to non-experts. I realize it can be difficult to review articles whose subject matter is unfamiliar. As a general suggestion, though, you may want to provide more specific and structured commentary with your reviews. When you comment on prose, for example, writing well-formed comments is important for credibility; sentences that read like this one - "The prose, I was starting to fell asleap, lots of times, I lost track what I was reading about, it lacks flow." - do not model good prose or provide directions for improvement. For better or worse, "interesting to the general reader" is not a necessary quality for a useful encyclopedia article. Opabinia regalis 06:05, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

GA nomination for Hepatitis C
The article Hepatitis C you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be adressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. → A z a  Toth 15:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah saw your review, I like that style of review with the detailed problems all defined. The review is mostly fair enough, but here's my thoughts. It would be useful if you added the jargon that needs helps. As far as I knew a link for example cirrhosis is enough for jargon - I could be wrong though. Also imo, "Transmission::Potential sources of exposure" is reasonable enough - yeah it's all blood based but the exact types of transmission are worth covering. I created a png image for this section based on the US CDC Hepatitis C site to show the main types visually (I didn't like the image they had - but it could be changed to theirs easily. Also I improved the liver image as the one that was there before was fairly poor as you note. Don't think I can do much about the rest though. Cheers. SeanMack 15:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Some words that might need a definition is "HCV-RNA", "HIV coinfection", "membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis" (red link), "genotype", and"Silybum marianum". → A z a  Toth 15:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Brain computer-interface

 * The only major problem is some pictures, most pictures dosn't have succinct and descriptive captions, Image:MiguelNicolelisActuator.jpg anit fair use for this article.

On Hold. → A z a  Toth 20:17, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for the review. Improving the picture captions. Just had a quick question about Image:MiguelNicolelisActuator.jpg. The copyright holder (Duke University) grants permission to use this image as long as Duke University is credited. Is this not sufficient for fair use? Cheers Saganaki- 03:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * To be able to claim fail use, the picture must "contribute significantly to the article", see Fair use. → A z a  Toth 11:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, image removed and captions edited. Do I pass back to you now or do I need to modify the entry on the GA candidates page? Cheers --Saganaki- 12:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No, it's good now :) → A z a  Toth 12:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! On to featured article.....--Saganaki- 12:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during October 15, 2006 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. →AzaToth 23:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I did not add what many others or I would no doubt consider to be my own personal analysis, I merely illustrated the juxtaposition, which exists between, Christian 'metal' and more traditional forms of metal. Keeping all personal analysis to the discussion page, do not confuse the two. Thank you. I have also more recently made additional information available on the band Mortification. The Crying Orc 09:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Communism reverts
Good catch on the smaller bit of vandalism from the revert, I definitely missed it ;) (and if you're going to respond, feel free to do it on my talk page, more likely I'll notice) Sdr 19:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

User Cyde
Hi there; I think you have the wrong user. I just sent Cyde a message on his talk page, but most certainly did not blank anything. I spend hours each day chasing vandalism, not causing it.--Anthony.bradbury 21:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it wasn't your attention, but according to this diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cyde&diff=81863007&oldid=81798048, you blanked. → A z a  Toth 21:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * And your edit aded the string: "U R A GHEY FAG" also. seems for me as vandalism. → A z a  Toth 21:28, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No. I put a question on his talk page asking where the image theron was a photo of. Noting else. Really. I have been editing here for seven months, newpage patrolling, nearly 3000 edits, and am not stupid. Really. Please re-check the linkage.--Anthony.bradbury 21:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Not to be an interloper, but it actually was another editor that put the "GHEY FAG" thing in. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Something is fishy here, the history tells another story. → A z a  Toth 21:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Friend, I have no idea what's going on. I am a 63-year old General Medical Practitioner. Can you really imagine that I would ask a perfectly sensible question, which still shows on the edit history, and precede it with a stupid and mis-spelled obscenity?--Anthony.bradbury 21:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a bug in the revision control, brion is checking it up at the moment, I'm sorry for the warning. → A z a  Toth 21:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, friend. As far as I can make out, the vandal is Yata89. He also blanked User:Cydes userpage, which I will now revert if no-one else has by now.--Anthony.bradbury 21:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)--Anthony.bradbury 21:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Give him the warning I sended to you :) → A z a  Toth 21:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok.--Anthony.bradbury 21:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * He has been blocked indefinitely by an admin as a vandalism-only account. But you did scare me for a moment.--Anthony.bradbury 22:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have taken the slight liberty of deleting your comment from my talk page. I know it is against wiki policy to remove talk, and you can revert if you feel it is appropriate, but I felt that as your comment was incorrectly directed, and as it makes me look unjustifiably bad to other editors, you would not object.--Anthony.bradbury 22:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. :) → A z a  Toth 22:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

My GA nomination of Vitamin
Don't know if this is the correct protocol?

Thank you for your review! I have reviewed your GA concerns and have (I think) addressed them all. I turned the "Notes" section into a table, and added the refs I used to compile the table. This section was basically a "legacy" section that I kept in (didn't want to step on anyone's toes), thanks for giving me a good reason to clean it up (hopefully it is much better)! Please let me know if any further problems crop up. Cheers--DO11.10 22:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's correct "protocol", article passed. → A z a  Toth 22:40, 16 October 2006 (UTC)