User talk:Buffbills7701/Archive 2

The Signpost: 07 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 02:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Thillaikrish
Hello Buffbills7701. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Thillaikrish, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''This is not nonsense - the user has simply put their own name on their use page. This is perfectly acceptable per WP:UPYES.''' Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the user changed it right before I speedy deletion tagged it. If you look in the history, you'll see something like "ttngliska". buffbills7701 11:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right but, except for obvious advertisements, copyvios or attack pages, users are generally allowed considerable freedom to do what they like on their own user pages. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

ENGVAR
If you're going to invoke WP:ENGVAR, please pay attention to WP:TIES.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  14:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Signpost Question
Can I ask you something? Could you please see this Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U2 (the yellow box content) and then this User_talk:Mabeenot and tell me what do you think? can you give me an answer? Thank you very much.  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  17:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that U2 doesn't have enough changes for a another Signpost article. Ask Mabeenot though. He might think otherwise. buffbills7701 18:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. May I ask you what other changes you think will help for another SP Article?  Miss Bono  [zootalk]  18:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I would think that maybe a couple more GAs and at least one FA would help your chances. buffbills7701 18:46, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Progress monitoring

 * Did you see the big list of references at the bottom? Did you check any within these 5minutes? How do you know they are not reliable? mabdul 14:59, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't believe I didn't see that. I guess I'm just used to having a references header. Undid my revision. buffbills7701 15:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't believe I didn't see that. I guess I'm just used to having a references header. Undid my revision. buffbills7701 15:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for nominating me for admin. Too bad it didn't work out, but hey, you tried! -- Auric    talk  02:34, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There's a huge amount of advice on Wikipedia about wanting  to be an admin, becoming an admin, and being an admin. I wrote a lot of it, not only, but also because my own RfA in spite of my considerable experience, was one of the most  unpleasant rides in my long life and one of the most contentious RfAs in recent Wikipedia history. It goes without saying, therefore, that nominators more than anyone else should be acutely aware of all that advice before they suggest to editors that they submit themselves to the 7-day trial of fire. That said, two things I would like to point out without wishing  to daunt anyone's enthusiasm: meta areas, especially those such as RfA need a lot of experience, and Buffbills, you have probably not been around long enough yet to  have noticed how delicate RfA can be; secondly, IMHO, I belive it to be unwise to create an RfA page before lengthy discussion with the candidate - there's nothing worse than naively accepting a nomination without fully understanding what's involved. The most comprehensive advice starts at WP:Advice for RfA candidates which also includes dozens of links to all the other advices  pages and examples. I'm always happy to offer tips on RfA stuff, don't hesitate to ask. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/How people can identify your business?
I see you removed the speedy from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/How people can identify your business?. If you read the last sentence and look at the only link, it's obviously an attempt to promote that business, especially when you consider the person creating the page works at that company, and they posted the link to the 'article' on their facebook. - Happysailor  (Talk) 12:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter for 21 August 2013
Both VisualEditor and MediaWiki were upgraded recently. For VisualEditor, this is the long-awaited post-Wikimania update with many bug fixes and enhancements. Work also continues on speed at opening and during use, as well as on the bugs reported here and at other Wikipedias. The full report is at Mediawiki.

References are displaying properly, even when nested or in image captions (.  Reference lists are now always fully populated with references (bug 50094).  Firefox users can insert an existing reference in the first paragraph .  Opera users no longer see corruption of categories when a reference was added (bug 50385).

Stray spaces are being stripped from the start of paragraphs to end one of the common  problems. We also fixed a round-tripping bug that caused desirable whitespace in templates (used to make templates more legible, e.g., by putting each parameter in an infobox on a separate line) to get corrupted (bug 51150).

Wikilink handling was improved. Users are not allowed to create internal links to invalid titles (titles that are actually impossible due to limits on acceptable character combinations in titles, not redlinks). You can extend wikilinks, but it won't do so over a wordbreak (like a space) (bugs 49931 and 51463).

A handful of fixes to the user interface were made. The toolbar doesn't float over personal tools after opening a dialog or the inspector. Toolbars were also re-written to be collapsible/expandable, with room for more icons. Buttons in dialogs can now be activated using the Tab and Shift key commands (bug 50047). This saves time for editors, because you don't need to take your hands off the keyboard to click a button. We fixed a handful of bugs that affected only certain articles or certain browsers, including toolbar buttons in Firefox (bug 51986) and dialog panels that didn't always scroll correctly (bug 51739). Bugs with undo/redo getting confused have been fixed.

Images, in addition to getting references displaying correctly, also saw improvements with a set-empty link parameter no longer corrupted (51963). We corrected thumbnail images' display so that they look don't wrong in some contexts (bug 51995). Inserted images no longer explicitly set their alignment, but instead inherit the default position in compliance with the Manual of Style (bug 51851).

More edit notices, warnings, and metadata like information about Pending Changes on an article now appear as appropriate (bug 49699). When new articles are created, users are now shown the   message (bug 51459). VisualEditor now handles templates that set "meta" items (like a category) and nothing else better (bug 51322). If the database is locked when a user tries to save with VisualEditor, they now get a message telling them as such and an opportunity to try again, rather than a silent failure (bug 51636).

When you save the page, having the default preference set to "mark all my edits as minor by default" no longer overrides the setting in the save dialog (bug 51515). If you open VisualEditor from a section edit link, the section's title will be pre-filled in in the edit summary box when you go to save it (bug 50872). The size of the save dialog box in the Monobook skin has been fixed (bug 50058). Also, wikipage content handlers like sortable tables are re-run automatically after saving.

A very early version of the mathematics equation editor is now available for testing on mw:Mediawiki. If you would like to help improve the user interface for math editor, please test out the extension at mw:Mediawiki:Sandbox and leave your comments directly at the discussion page for the Math Node User Interface at Mediawiki. You should be able to use your regular username and password should to login to Mediawiki.

For other questions or suggestions, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting problem reports at VisualEditor/Feedback and other ideas at Wikipedia talk:VisualEditor. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 17:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Report frequency
How often would you like to write WikiProject Reports? If you'd like to do one every other week, let me know and we'll alternate weeks. If you'd prefer to write less frequently, are there any dates in the next few months that you'd like to set aside for your reports? –Mabeenot (talk) 04:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that maybe once a month would be fine for me. Is that OK for you? (By the way, sorry for the wait. I was on vacation and forgot to announce that I was on a WikiBreak.) buffbills7701 22:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine. Go ahead and add yourself to the schedule for the weeks you'd like to take in the next few months and I'll fill in the rest of the schedule. –Mabeenot (talk) 06:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tacoma RIse Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Tacoma RIse Logo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:51, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 August 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update
Hey Buffbills7701. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Interview request: Your work with WP:Snuggle
I'm contacting you about a study that I'm running with TheOriginalSoni exploring newcomer mentorship activities in Wikipedia. I'd like to ask you a few questions about your work with WP:Snuggle and observe your use of it in order to figure out where the tool is and isn't working. The interview and demo session will take 30 minutes to an hour depending on how much time we spend discussing things. If you're interested, let me know. Thanks for your consideration. --EpochFail (talk &bull; contribs) 21:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Study overview: meta:Research:Peer_mentorship_and_snuggle
 * Consent form: meta:Research:Peer_mentorship_and_snuggle/Consent

VisualEditor newsletter for September 5
This Thursday's VisualEditor update was mostly about stability and performance improvements, and some preparatory work for major planned improvements, along with bug fixes for non-English language support and right-to-left text. Everything that the English Wikipedia received today has been running on Mediawiki for a week already.

Officially, the problem with the link inspector not linking to a specific section on a page (bug 53219) was fixed in this release, although that critical patch actually appeared here earlier.

A number of bugs related to copy-and-paste functionality were fixed (48604, bug 50043, bug 53362, bug 51538, among others). Full rich copy-and-paste from external sources into VisualEditor is expected "soon".

In other fixes, you can no longer add empty ref tags (bug 53345). Selecting both an image and some text, and then trying to add a link, previously deleted the selected image and the text. This was fixed in bug 50127. There was another problem related to using arrow keys to move the cursor next to an inline image that was fixed (bug 53507).

Looking ahead: The next planned upgrade is scheduled for next Thursday, and you should expect to find a redesigned toolbar with drop-down menus that include room for references, templates, underline, strikethrough, superscript, subscript, and code formatting. There will also be keyboard shortcuts for setting the format (paragraph vs section headings).

If you are active at other Wikipedias, the next group of Wikipedias to have VisualEditor offered to all users is being determined at this time. Generally speaking, languages that depend on the input method editor are not going to receive VisualEditor this month. The current target date is Tuesday, September 24 for logged-in users only. You can help with translating the documentation. In several cases, most of the translation is already done, and it only needs to be copied over to the relevant Wikipedia. If you are interested in finding out whether a particular Wikipedia is currently on the list, you can leave a message for me at my talk page.

For other questions or suggestions, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting problem reports at VisualEditor/Feedback and other ideas at Wikipedia talk:VisualEditor. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Tabs
Thanks for taking the time to put the tab there at the end linking to page tabs. I don't think I would have found it had I not somehow been directed to your userpage. T C  N7 JM  13:28, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Concept (Rapper)
Hey Buffbills7701, im sorry for deleting your CSD on Concept (Rapper) page because iam fairly new to Wikipedia, but can you please give me insight as to why this article does not have a significant importance? Thank You in advance Johnhoward217 (talk) 02:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't personally give you insight, but here are two policies that might help you. Criteria_for_speedy_deletion and Notability (music). Hope you enjoy! buffbills7701 02:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Concept (rapper)
Hello, I recently deleted your speedy deletion tag off of the Concept (Rapper) article because I do not understand as to why it has no meaning or importance, Writing about a well known persons life and career does not result in no importance.Nithind119 (talk) 02:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Retag/vs/undo or Rollback
In the future, to avoid cluttering the person's talkpage, I'd usually rollback or undo any removals of CSD/BLPPROD tags - it makes it easier and less intimidating (if you got 8 messages as a new user saying delete delete delete delete would you read them?). ~ Charmlet -talk- 02:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 September 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 08:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Gladiators events.
Per Articles for deletion/Atlaspheres, I have deleted all of the listed articles. I have also proposed to merge List of American Gladiators events with List of Gladiators UK events, as the materials onthose pages are largely duplicative. Based on your participation in the deletion discussion, you may also wish to participate in the merge discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:20, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Related AfD
Since you commented at Articles for deletion/Chikako Watanabe, please note I've now AfD the related Articles for deletion/Shigeo Tamaru. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:09, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Pixar Universe
You messed things up when you closed this, it's fixed now though. I strongly recommend using this script in the future, makes closing Afds a hell of a lot easier. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've already tried installing the script, and I noticed that it doesn't work on my IE or Firefox. buffbills7701 20:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Carl Fitzgerald was accepted
 Carl Fitzgerald, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Zach Vega ( talk to me ) 23:37, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)