User:Risker/Flowtest

Purpose of this page
This page is to estimate one day's worth of postings to a user's Flow stream based solely on discussion pages (talk pages or other pages focused on discussion) that I personally watch. My current watchlist, excluding pages within my own userspace, consists of:
 * 270 articles
 * 64 user pages
 * 5 noticeboards and village pumps (excluding ANI and AN, which I do not routinely watch)
 * 100 other Wikipedia space pages
 * 24 other pages (files, Mediawiki space, etc.)

This is a total of 463 pages. Of those, at least 75 of those pages are included on my watchlist specifically so that I have an easy method of relocating them. Nonetheless, I will include them in the totals.

Assumptions

 * Users will wish to continue to follow user and article talk pages they have on their watchlist
 * Users will continue to follow pages in which they have a broad interest in order to identify when a new thread is created (e.g., policy pages, noticeboards on which they are active, Wikiproject pages)
 * Users will watch threads of interest to them on a wide range of pages including noticeboards

Internal rules for this page

 * Aside from user talk pages, I will include all posts to the applicable pages made in a 24-hour period, whether or not they are subsequently deleted or removed
 * For user talk pages, I will include an aggregate total of the volume of posting to those pages during the period in question
 * Admin actions such as protecting, deleting, revision-deleting or moving a page will count as a "ping"
 * Removed data from any page will be counted as a "ping" rather than a calculation of volume
 * For noticeboards and other pages that I do not normally watch, I will include the postings to any thread that I have posted in, that I am following with interest, or that has otherwise been brought to my attention.

-
 * Total volume of user talk page posts: = 59,692
 * Total number of "pings" for removal of content or other action

Mediawiki space
From MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist

www.examiner.com
Why is www.examiner.com blacklisted? This is a VERY reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.232.202 (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Because anyone can write an article at examiner.com if they style themselves an "expert" or "passionate" about a subject. There is little or no editorial review. It is not a reliable source, it is a glorified wiki without the checks and balances of Wikipedia.&mdash; D'Ranged 1  VTalk  02:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

=
open-media-community.com, bd-dvd-copying-ripping.blogspot.tw, www.pavtube.cn, www.pavtube.com, www.flvsoft.com, www.bluray-dvd-converter, www.my-video-converter.com, device-camcorder-tips.blogspot.com, camcordervideoshare.altervista.org======

These have been the subject of persistent spamming from a spammer using at least one account (Special:Contributions/JeanLiu520) and numerous IP addresses, including Special:Contributions/58.240.189.22, Special:Contributions/61.64.61.160, Special:Contributions/192.184.42.203, Special:Contributions/192.184.42.204, Special:Contributions/66.226.74.49. At least some of the IP addresses used are proxies, and at least some of them are listed as spam sources on several other websites, such as www.liveipmap.com and whatismyipaddress.com.

Early spam from this source was fairly routine linkspam, but for a long time now there has been frequent posting of large chunks of spam to talk pages, as for example in this edit. There is a good deal of this, much of it in deleted edits, such as, and.

Here are just a few examples of the spamming from over the years. There are many more.
 * December 2008
 * May 2009
 * March 2010
 * April 2010
 * March 2014
 * April 2014
 * June 2014

The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:17, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Magzter.com
Magzter.com sells magazine subscription. added links to them at Elle (magazine), India Today, and Cosmopolitan (magazine). User hasn't added any more beyond those three since I left a talkpage message, so not reporting the user, but I noticed magzter.com isn't listed yet and probably should be. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  23:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Template talk
From Template talk:Infobox person

"Television"
Through what bizarre turn of events did there get added a "television" parameter, described as "Television programmes presented by or closely associated with the subject." Why not "Classic cars - Classic cars restored by the subject" or "Most disliked - vegetable most disliked by the subject." EEng (talk) 05:56, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * As with many weird and wonderful parameters in this template, it's the result of preparation for a template merger, in this case . It occurred more than four years ago - see ; this discussion; first TfD; and second TfD. Despite those two TfDs, the merge doesn't seem to have been completed: I think that and  should be made aware. -- Red rose64 (talk) 09:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Infobox chef is now a wrapper for Infobox person - check the former's source code. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The merger-prep explanation makes sense -- I was just wondering. WP templates are like old abandoned cemeteries, with kicked-over gravestones, enigmatic inscriptions recalling the days of yore, and so on. By the way, is it just accident that there are two porcine-related editors active on templates -- "Pigs on the wing" and "Plastics pork"? EEng (talk) 13:46, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Tough crowd, apparently. EEng (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Infobox Spouse(s) — Should we indicate “spouse=None” or just omit
Copied from Village pump (policy)

Noticed an IP editor made this edit changing “spouse=Single” to “spouse=None” — no big deal, but it got me thinking, and looking for policy regarding, (in general) should InfoBoxes indicate ‘no spouse’ or should that just be omitted? Is there any agreement as to what we should be doing… my sense is that we should probably just leave that out of the Infobox if they're single; if their marital status (or particularly their lack thereof) is important (such as for a star of The Bachelor or something), then it can be included in the article somewhere, but otherwise trivial information about what isn't doesn't seem appropriate for the InfoBox. Cheers —  Who R you?  Talk 03:14, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * In principle this should be discussed at Template talk:Infobox person. The documentation shown on the template page is silent on the matter, but I like Guy Macon's approach (diff) which is applicable here: Atheism is not a religion. Bald is not a hair color. Off is not a TV channel. Barefoot is not a shoe. Silence is not a sound. Never is not a date or a time. Clear is not a color. Johnuniq (talk) 03:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, both for pointing me to the right page to ask the question and for your response! Cheers —   Who R you?  Talk 04:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Marital status being basic information that one reasonably expects to find in even the most basic bio, I think there should be an entry even if the datum is "None", just so the reader doesn't have to hunt around in the article for the answer. The same logic applies to "Children" though, for some reason, my intuition tells me it's not quite the same. In one article I included Spouse=None | Children=None precisely because it is commonly, and mistakenly, reported that the subject did have spouse and children (and of course the article text addresses that as well). EEng (talk) 17:49, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "none" is not helpful. in both RS and common language the person's marital status is "unmarried." we can save the omit option for when we do not know one way or the other. Rjensen (talk) 01:27, 28 November 2014 (UTC)