User talk:Ched/Archive 2

This page is where exchange comments with friends and other editors. All users are welcome to leave a message. Unless you state otherwise, I'll assume we are (or can be) friends. Feel free to leave any notes, suggestions, complaints, or anything else. I respond to almost anything reasonable, (but I'll only respond to vandalism or stupidity if it's funny). After archives, some items maintained due to value.

Right and Wrong
[...]


 * In answer to your first question, nope, you don't need references on your userpage. You may put any information you like on your userpage, as long as it doesn't violate your privacy. In answer to your second question, there are the Wikipedia IRC channels which may also be helpful.



Best, Peter Symonds ( talk ) 20:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

How to fix pictures used for TV shows and movies
[...] I see the warning thing about fair use regarding a screen shot of an episode. when I click on the link ... it takes me to a page with the picture. there is an explanation for why it's called fair use. I've read a bunch of the links and fair use stuff. what still has to be done?

[...]
 * the talk page in question is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fair_Haven_(Star_Trek:_Voyager)
 * the picture page is here, and lists why it's fair: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ST-VOY_6_11.jpg


 * Nothing else needs to be done now. The warning will stay there until it's removed or something. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 05:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, the "done" check box is done. Merry Fishmas to you too, from me and the otters. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 05:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Communication
Hey, just read the Communication subpage you created, and I just wanted to say it is absolutely fantastic! Very appropriate and truly accurate. I really hope others (both new here and "old-timers") will find and read that essay. If nothing similar exists in terms of Wiki essays (and I don't immediately see anything), I may have to get you to prettify it, move it to the Wikipedia: space and place it in Category:Wikipedia essays. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, any time. You've obviously got brains and drive, and that is very welcome around here. Before tucking it into the main essays category, it should probably be looked at by a variety of others to pull additional opinions. Do you use IRC? Wikipedia editors/admins/lurkers have a strong presence on Freenode...you can get a lot of second and third opinions there. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

[...] "view admin info in archives"

Re;Joyride
Hi Ched - basically if the article is very short, you add a stub template at the bottom of the article (either the plain stub or one of the more precise ones - if you simply add stub, a stub-sorter will change it to a more precise one soon enough, but if you can even make it a slightly more precise one it'll save work later). Usually if it's that short, then it'll be pretty obvious the sort of thing that the article needs.

If it's a longer article but still needs work, and you're less sure that it's easy to see what still needs attention, add an expand template at the top instead, and put details on the talk page. The difference between "short" and "longer" is pretty arbitrary and depends a lot on what the subject is (I've got a short essay on that at User:Grutness/Croughton-London rule of stubs), but if it's more than a couple of screens-full of information, it's usually beyond being a stub. Hope you enjoy your time on Wikipedia - keep up the good work :) Grutness...wha?  01:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments
I've been on here about 4 years now, and I've had my share of outraged moments, but I've decided that there are better ways to handle things. I try to keep a sense of humor, and have learned to work within the rules to deal with POV-pushers and vandals, rather than edit-warring with them, which is a waste of time and emotional energy. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 06:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Star Trek
oh no, you didn't interfere at all. I was using Huggle to do the reverts and if someone beats me to it, the program automatically cancels the request. Thanks for helping keep the vandalism down btw. Happy editing! Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 18:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC) [...]

WP:FILMS Welcome
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for December has been published.  January's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * [...]

British and American spellings
Hi -- I see you've been doing spelling corrections; a much-needed job. You might want to take a look at this page; when an article is clearly tied to one or other side of the Atlantic, it uses British English or Canadian English as appropriate. For other articles which don't have a tie, the rule is that they stay in whichever variant they were first written in -- so an article on Mozart or coral reefs would stay in British English if it was originally written in that version of English, and would stay in American English if it was written that way. I do see in your edit history a couple of pages that are clearly British so you might want to take a look at those. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 19:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC) [...]
 * If you use Firefox, you can easily download British, Canadian, and Australian English dictionaries to more easily spell-check articles. I use those, plus Spanish and German, and it makes life so much easier. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 20:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC) [...]


 * A link would be useful. They are just addons, located at https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browse/type:3. After installing them, you can right click in any text box and select the appropriate dictionary under "Languages". — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:46, 11 January 2009 (UTC) [...]

truth
If this helps, put it this way: while you and most other editors may believe there is only one truth, put all of you together and we end up with "many truths." NPOV says that we have to include all significant views ... so it is likely several articles will not only included different views claiming all to to be the truth, but some contradictory views claiming to the the truth. NOR says Wikipedians have to keep their own arguments out of Wikipedia, so there is no point in different editors arguing which truth is right. So how do we decide which claims we have to include, and which ones we can leave out? If you have followed my reasoning in the first three sentences, you will understand why screaming more and more loudly that "this is the truth" won't get us anywhere. That is where "verifiability" comes in. I hope this makes sense. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC) [...] the remainder of this extended conversation is educational, and can be found here

Re
No problem, I was testing Huggle out and I just randomly reverted that users/IP's edits. Eh, yeah you owe me two :P (You cheated!) But yeah, its crazy over here, too many parties and commotion, but all for the great :)-- TRU    CO   02:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Tigers
Thanks for the nice comment on my essay. I glanced at your recent edits and noticed your comment to Aether about passion; you might also like this essay. Mike Christie (talk) 04:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC) [[...]

Advert
[...]
 * The advert tag would be proper, in fact so would db-spam. I've just deleted the article as blatant advertising and totally unverifiable.
 * Very blatant ads (like that one) can be marked with a speedy deletion tag. Less problematic ones can be tagged as you suggested, and it should get dealt with soon (i.e., eventually). If it's really bad, but not "speediable", you can also nominate it for deletion. And if you're ever not sure, this method or the help desk works too. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 05:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Still not understanding what you want to do?!?
The essay looks written, and it is currently in your user namespace, which is where it likely belongs. I would like to help, but I don't know what exactly you want to DO with this essay? --Jayron32. talk . contribs 06:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome
The I.P. I reverted on your talk page was a long-term troll who has something against User:Abd (it's why User talk:Abd is indefinitely semi-protected). Not really sure what his/her problem is, and I'm not over-eager to find out. On a side note, I notice you're new-ish here; you seem to be doing very well, but if you ever need a hand from an administrator and/or experienced contributor, feel free to let me know. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 22:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Nothing Important
I'm doing just peaches, the new GPU is working a treat. How's everything on your end? &mdash; neuro  (talk)  02:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Peter is a good friend of mine, it is good that he is an administrator again, and it says something that the community can be deep enough to see sense after that incident. Good work on Twilight - I mostly make minor edits to articles (only one which I've really done major work on has been Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia), so I'm not usually one to comment on article building, but from what I can see you're doing some excellent work, and you should keep it up. You seem to be catching on fast, esp. with your dives into policy. I often say "Wikipedia is not supposed to be true", and that is correct. I guess the best way of putting it is that we are only as reliable as our sources, and when we don't have one of those, then the whole point of the encyclopaedia is lost. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  02:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Rollback granted
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! – xeno  ( talk ) 03:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.
 * Just go slow with huggle, make sure you only use it for proper vandalism and you'll do fine.

User:BigBrotherFanFiction
I don't understand what you're saying. The user is creating fan fiction, he is not using Wikipedia to write an article on a real show, he's playing a game, and encouraging others to do the same thing (see the hidden comments in the article). Why would we keep that. AnyPerson (talk) 05:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're probably right - I just wanted to TRY to work with a new user, and I hate to see a User Page get deleted, rather than blanked and replaced with info that wasn't out of line. If within 24 hours, I can't make some changes, I'll back you all the way.  I should probably change my name to Patron saint of lost causes .. ;)  Ched (talk) 06:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey Jude... :) Not a problem, but Wikipedia just had a run of people using User pages to create fake beauty pageants, and that took a while to sort out.  We don't need fake Big Brother stuff, too.  AnyPerson (talk) 17:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I did suggest he go to a site like Geocities that doesn't care about encyclopediality (is that a word?) :)  AnyPerson (talk) 18:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I think Dubya should stick with trying to learn how to pronounce real words, first. :) AnyPerson (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Confederate States of America? That's not a movie. I think I know the movie you're talking about, it was a TV movie, but I can't remember the title. AnyPerson (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes! That's the movie I was thinking of. AnyPerson (talk) 04:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:CSEC
Ched Davis! Thank You for your assistance with WikiProject Malware! To better serve Wikipedia, this project has been closed. We thank you for all of your hard work, and we would like to invite you to our new Wikiproject at WikiProject Computer Security. We hope to see you soon! Sephiroth storm (talk) 08:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks, happy editing – Capricorn42 ( talk ) 07:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

trying to get support for signing on the account
Norton anti virus account reset isn't working on my computer. my wife tried to reset the password with the temporary password e-mailed it prompt her to type the old one in. at one time you could get help with this issue, now there seem like there is no links to customer service. this is a sad issue because if you lose or haven't sign into your account over a long period of time it seems like there is no way the issue could be resolved.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.205.181.165 (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't currently run Norton, so I'm not sure I can help. I do know of an editor that seems to be very knowledgeable about Norton however, and I will make him/her aware of your post.  The editor and I have not interacted directly, however, in reading his work here, it appears that he/she is very up to date about Norton.  Also, you may want to post a question at the Computer section of our Reference Desk. In A very quick search of the Norton site, I did find this Ched (talk) 01:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Have you tried to contact Norton Support? Sephiroth storm (talk) 03:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * So the password/e-mail address combo for signing in to your Norton account and thus, your subscription days, is not working? Is that correct? In that case contact support @ norton.com/support. Just wondering, what year/version do you have?


 * Just a note, you don't have to sign in; you just need for product key. However, for Norton 360, you need to sign in to access all 2gb of online storage; otherwise you have none; it's for security reasons. TechOutsider (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider

Re: Questioning my own actions
Well, I'm not sure which talk page post you are referring to. I see comments on Ioeth and QuackGuru, but I can't seem to locate the comment on the blocked subject's page. In general, it is typically okay to retract your own comments if no one else has replied to it, though it is frowned upon to orphan replies. Give me some more context and hopefully I can give you better advice. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 04:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * No, I see no problem with removing your comment, especially since you gave a valid reason for doing so in the edit summary. You are doing fine...don't be afraid to be bold, so long as you have a sound reason for doing so. Always be willing to defend yourself and your actions here, and to ask for explanation from others when you feel the wrong action has been taken. You do good work in my opinion :) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 08:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Always appreciate your time and input. I often think before I hit save "WWHD" (What Would Huntster Do).  You inspire confidence, and encourage me to do my best here.  You have a unique talent, and I appreciate it! — Ched (talk) 20:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Dylan Thomas Prize
Yes, you were quite right, but someone else has fixed it already. Thanks anyway. Deb (talk) 21:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Malwarebytes
The article's looking great, although it's hard for me to figure out what was your personal contribution, looks like there was somebody's vandalism that you were dealing with thrown in there too. Anyway, thanks so much for your work on what was once a little stub, abandoned to the cold winds of WP:SD. All of the added content is appropriate, ditto for the removed content, and the format is much improved. I agree with the move, too - the one thing I know for sure was you. Fredgoat (talk) 09:48, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Why thank you. A lot of my stuff didn't stay long due to another editor that simply hit the 'revert' button (sometimes with sarcastic "whatever" remarks) within hours or even minutes of my efforts.  (S)he even deleted talk page comments.  But given that the editor had a lot more edits and time (about 90% of the edits being reverts), I didn't fight it.  I thought it would have been better if the editor had been a little kinder and helpful, but maybe (s)he didn't have much ability to actually contribute to the article constructively, and simply went with his/her strong points of "revert".  At one point I had a description of the other files posted, and more info on the company.  I'm just glad TechOutsider came along and did all the work he/she did.  I was working on the MS Antivirus article at the same time, and would have liked to added more info on how to combat these nasties, but the "This is not a HOWTO" thing doesn't really allow that.  I'll try to get back to those few articles here shortly, and see if maybe I can add some things (now that I'm getting a little more experience).  I appreciate your note, AND your work on the subject matter.  I look forward to working with you more in the future. ;) — Ched (talk) 11:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC) (cc: User talk:Fredgoat)

Re:thanks
No problem. Your Wikipedia experience is a learning curve, and everyone makes mistakes at the beginning, so no worries there. Judging by the deletion discussion, the article will be kept, and can only avoid re-nomination by the elimination of "how-to" style material. If you are one of those "salvage lost causes" guys, I suggest putting in some work at the Article rescue squadron. Well, thanks for the note of appreciation, and let's hope the Steelers' defensive prowess can shut down the Cardinals. :) --Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not sure we ended up "shutting them down", but  at least we won. ;) — Ched (talk) 05:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thank you for the trust you placed in me by supporting my RfA (which passed and, apparently, I am now an admin!). I will do my best to continue to act in a way that is consistent with the policies of wikipedia as well with our common desire to build and perfect this repository of human knowledge; and can only hope that you never feel that your trust was misplaced. Thanks again! --Regent's Park (Rose Garden) 23:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm really impressed that you're taking the time to do this in such a personal way (typing rather than template). Very nice gesture, and it shows real character. I think we might have a keeper here ;) .. Good Luck Regents.  — Ched (talk) 05:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC) (cc: User talk page (after he's had a few days to settle in))


 * I would like to thank you as well for your support. Its a close one right now, and I appreciate everyone who has voted, both supporting and opposing votes. It will help me to become a better editor, and better able to support the community. Blessings, Sephiroth storm (talk) 09:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied 09:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

tb
Edit Centric (talk) 09:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2009 Newsletter
The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject Films newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank You. — Ched (talk) 21:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I didnt change anything
I didnt change the bush gore page.damn romanian gypsies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.28.252 (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Dear Ma'am or Sir. Please note at the end of the message that I left you is the statement about the change coming from an IP address.  The history of the Bush v. Gore page indicates someone who was logged on to the Internet with the IP address that you used/are using - made changes to the page.  It is common for Internet users to have different IP address each time they get on the Internet.  This is done by the ISP (Internet Service Provider), rather than the individual editors.  You may want to consider signing up for an account - that would assure you of having a unique login when you visit Wikipedia, as well as build an edit history of your contributions to our site.  The message was in no way intended to insult you, but, it functions as a log for others to see where changes to the pages are coming from.  I apologize if you have received this message in error.


 * cc: here — Ched (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Here We Go!
Hey Ched, sorry i didn't get back to you before, yeah i know it was a great game! Santi Holmes definately made it for me!

And as for my sig, its just colours with superscript / subscript. You can get them in the toolbar just above this edit box :) --SteelersFanUK06  ReplyOnMine!   12:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep! Great game. dawntawn was a real get together yesterday.  Great parade and all, just a little chilly though ... lol.  Ya have to love the folks who bleed black and gold. ;)
 * I've been reading up a little on the sig. stuff - looks like simple html markup. I might try to come up with something in the near future. (cc: here} — Ched (talk) 20:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Tara Chatterjea
Hi Ched, thanks for your e-mail. I am Arkadev Chatterjea, Ph.D., Professor of Finance (Visiting) at U of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Usually, I am based in India. I am a regular user of wiki (like many of my friends and relatives), contributor to the project (occasional financial and editorial contributions, corrections, ...). Being on the other side of 40, I admit, I am quite overwhelmed by the programming etc. that are required to be a good and effective contributor to wiki. Hence, some of my articles are short and have shortcomings (Well, I am trying to improve!). Tara Chatterjea happens to be my mother. She is a distinguished philosopher in India, who works on Indian philosophy. Her collection of scholarly articles (in English) was published by Lexington Press, USA, and is available through Amazon and B&N. Four of her articles have been published in the "Journal of Indian Philosophy," which, along with "Philosophy East and West" are generally considered to be top peer-reviewed journals for Indian philosophy articles. Last fall, she published another scholarly volume, in Bengali, on philosophy of ancient text the Gita. There aren't many people who have published scholarly books in their native country in native language and also in English in the USA. To summarize, I contributed the article but tried to make it fairly objective as per wiki's standards. If you can help improve the article, that would be fantastic. Re my other contributions: entry on Shiba P. Chatterjee (no relation) was inspired by my memory of reading a textbook by him when we were in 7th grade. He was the president of International Geographical Union, a very distinguished honor for someone from that part of the world. The one Forward Markets Commission was prompted by something I came across in my professional work. Thank you, Arkadev —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkachatterjea (talk • contribs) 19:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Arkadev! I hope you're enjoying North Carolina.  I think you did a fine job of being objective on the Tara Chatterjea article.  In looking through google, google scholar, and google books - I believe there are enough secondary sources to reference the article.  It may take me a few days to do much with the article, (lots going on both on and off wiki for me), but I will make the effort.  I'm fairly new, but I've seen a lot of other great editors willing to help as well.  I came across the article while patrolling new pages, and thought I should let you know about the WP:COI stuff.  There are a lot of wiki-editors who love to go through and tag things for deletion, but I would rather fix and improve articles than just mark them for deletion.
 * As far as the other side of 40, just wait - being on the other side of 50 (although not by much), I often find it difficult keeping up with the young editors as well. Worse yet, is trying to explain why things are the way they are.  They've had cell phones, IM, the Internet, and other chat-room types of things their entire lives, and have no idea how it got there.
 * Well, if you run across any links or sources that you think would be helpful in improving the article, please feel free to drop them here for me. I'll try to get a few things done with the article over the next few days. — Ched (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Ched, I appreciate this. Your e-mail prompted me to be more curious about how wikipedia works and I was amazed to find about how it self-regulates itself and makes constant efforts to improve. E.g., I just found out about the ratings (previously, overlooked it)-Stub, and so on, and all the way to Featured Articles. They are very, very good. As someone in academia who has to write a lot and rely on other sources to reference in one's writing, I really appreciate the silent good work that great editors like you are doing. BTW, there was a wikipedia featured article on Anekantavada which cites her book that is mentioned here. Now, I have added ISBN info for the book. If I find other secondary sources that satisfy wikipedia's standard, I will surely add them. Best regards, Arkadev —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkachatterjea (talk • contribs) 06:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Ched. Read your message also in my talk page (slowly getting a feel for these resources). Looks real nice. Also, gives me ideas--I would use these as templates when cleaning up entries that I come across in wiki :-) Best regards, Arka —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkachatterjea (talk • contribs) 23:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted
No, you did nothing wrong; I just happened to be around, agreed with your tagging, and, being an almighty administrator :)), deleted the page. Cheers, and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 08:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The almightyness is, of course, limited to the en-wikipedia....and don't be to jumpy. Everything done here is usually easy to revert and/or correct, and after all we're supposed to have fun build an encyclopedia. But having been around for almost 5 years now...you see, everything is relative. Lectonar (talk) 08:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - appreciate the moral support ;) — Ched (talk) 08:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

AN/I thread
Holding a watching brief is no more than to say, the user in question deserves to be watched since there's a likelihood that they may repeat whatever behaviour got them reported in the first place; but at the moment there's no activity from the user and no more sanctions that can be taken. Can you request it? Yes & no. If there's a user whose behaviour is causing concern, that can be brought to AN/I and in general, the user will then get watched. It's not a thing I;d request directly (please take a watching brief on XYZ), so much as XYZ is doing PQR, kindly take a look. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank You!
re: The Larry Sanger 3O redact. Thank you so much for that edit summary! First great laugh I've had in all too long. Just wish I get out that easily. ;) — Ched (talk) 13:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. I know its sometimes hard to step away from editing differences but it is best to do so from time to time to keep one's sanity :) The article/project will still be here and will still be open to revision/discussion. The best thing I have found is to get as many NPOV eyes involved as possible which can be difficult on "low level" articles or ones that are heated and divisive. I am not sure what the deal is here, but I have been involved in the past in regards to the Wikipedia co-founders "issue". I firmly believe that it is critical that Sanger's role as co-founder not be "bastardized" over time simple because he is no longer part of the project or simple because Jimbo now considers himself the sole founder. Anyways, good luck and stay cool. --Tom 14:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that part of it I never got near (Jimbo and the founder/co-founder). I figure that got hashed out long ago. But, I do think I'll take that advise about the regroup and refresh for a bit. ;). — Ched (talk) 14:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to self: Don't WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT — Ched (talk) 15:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Twilight
No worries. Whenever you return to it and address the issues, let me know and I'll be happy to take another look. Best wishes and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Watch Page
Hi Ched. I was looking at my watch page, and I noticed some red/green numerical ratings. Some of my edits received a +rating, while others recieved a - rating. Is that an automated process or based on user contributions? Or am I failing to grasp the concept at all here? TechOutsider (talk) 22:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider


 * Hi Tech, how you doin today? If you're talking about what I think you are, they aren't ratings - they simply denote how many bytes of information have been added or deleted from the total size of the file.  If you add a sentence, you'll see it as green and a +25 (for example) ... but if you shorten up a paragraph and remove redundant wording - you'll see a red -12 (for example). Check your talk page history after I paste this and see if that seems to be the case. — Ched (talk) 22:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC) (cc: to user talk page)

Bootable thumbdrive

 * Hi there, the only experience i have with making a thumb drive bootable is installing a OS directly on it from a computer that does not have a hard drive. It has worked very well. i have a 4 gig drive with a fully updated virsion of ubuntu 8.10 with some windows repair utilities on it. So far the only problem with it that i have come across is if i load a driver for medium to high end video card, it will give me problems when i move to another computer. So to Avoid that i simply use generic drivers. I hope this helped. –  El lio tt   17:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:Bite
Interesting read of your comments at Bite. It is definitally a problem. I liked your simple, easy to read instructions. Informal. Welcoming. "Have a seat. Don't mind all those Scholars. Your their equal. You just don't know it yet"...Im working at the Articles for deletion section. It is sad how MANY newbies are treated poorly. I think its fair to say that we wikipedians treat obvious vandals with more courtesy than a well-intentioned newbie.--Buster7 (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

AV
IIRC turning updates to execute invisibly in the scheduler stops the popup. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  17:36, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Raceways
Raceways are so far out of my area of expertise that I wouldn't even venture a guess on the notability of such a topic. The one thing to remember here is that notability is not contagious. That is to say, just because a famous person did something somewhere does not allow the venue where it happened to "catch" their notability. The venue has to be notable on its own behalf, not as the place where something happened to take place or somebody notable appeared. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

See:Extended Hand
I had a nice stroll around your place. Very nice. Friendly. I'm glad we are neighbors. --Buster7 (talk) 01:17, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I just read your User:Ched Davis/communication. Thank you. Early on I created User:Buster7/Wikiknights. Its still "on the vine", waiting to mature. I think they both respond to a need. If you don't mind I may add to your communication...not now, but after a few re-reads. Please feel free to integrate new edits into my treatise as well. I hope you enjoy my work as much as I enjoyed yours.--Buster7 (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * By all means - I've never really gotten around to fleshing that essay out. Perhaps now that I've been here a whole whopping 3 months (LOL), I should revisit that as well. ;) .. I read through your Knights article, very nice indeed - I may have a go at it in the future.  I guess it's a "fine line" in a "gray area" that we walk in regards to welcoming new users.  I've been told I can be a bit to "forumish" (I'll plead guilty) at times.  I understand that Wikipedia isn't meant to be a social networking endeavor, but I also think it wouldn't hurt to be a bit more friendly.  At least we have the User talk pages, so that does address much of the let's get to know each other issues.


 * I originally got involved to edit some Star Trek stuff, some movies maybe, and perhaps some computer related issues - but I admit I've been sidetracked a bit in new page patrols, a spell checking tool, and some of the various boards that discuss wrong doing (AN/ANI) to some extent. I don't post too much to the admin boards though (I figure that's mostly for them to use in dealing with issues).  I'll usually only post if a topic has drifted into humor, or it's a request for community input.  Good place to learn what not to do though.  I got kind of caught up in the Study skills article after seeing it up for AfD, and I got way to involved in the Larry Sanger article (mostly talk page rather than any actual edits of mine), since he was one of the founding fathers/parents of Wikipedia.  It just seems that given his place in history - it's an article that we should "get it right" as Jimbo would say.  Anyway - a real pleasure meeting you, and I look forward to making it a better site with your help. ;) — Ched (talk) 04:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Deletionists are the harbinger of a possible future at WIkiWorld. Ive always found that by clicking on "random article search" and doing what I can to improve the articles that surface from the abyss is very theraputic. Very little flack or confrontation...a good sense of accomplishment and success. Even an ocasssional thank you. Give 't a go, mate! Good Luck!--Buster7 (talk) 04:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I definitely agree. If you have trouble with folks deleting things, then drop those pages and don't revisit for a long while. If you like doing random research, the Random Article button is definitely the way to go. Wikipedia can be a fun hobby if you don't let the vandals and other ninnies get to you. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 05:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Stick candy
If you want to see a real fight, check out the arguing over a certain intimate part of a woman's body that may or may not exist at maturity and may or may not be legitimately identifiable, depending on who you believe. The picture was enough to scare me off after a while, especially since a lot of the feuding was about the picture itself and whether it should be included.

Thanks for your kind words. Sometimes it's a bit frustrating to spend time arguing over minutae when there are so many more useful ways to spend time, but at least everyone involved seems to mean well. If there were better sources describing the basics like size, length and price, that would be great. But I think sometimes compromises have to be made based on good faith. Providing an element of verifiability seems to me to be more helpful than leaving the information out completely or including no sources at all. But maybe that's not what the policies indicate. I try to defer to the "does it make the encyclopedia better" standard and the other guideline about throwing out the rules when necessary. It's always interesting on here that's for sure. I had an article speedied, a hold-on posted, the speedy removed, an AfD started, and the AfD withdrawn, all within 17 minutes from the time I created the article. I'm thinking that may be some kind of record! Enjoy your weekend. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * 17 minutes? geesh. Probably should be a rule that only admins can tag an article within (say 3 - 5 days maybe) for deletion.  Just for spam, NPA, etc.  Should be allowed a couple days to work out the kinks in an article without having to battle the "delete police".  Way too many editors going around with a fist full of speedy and AfD tags, just because they can't actually contribute in a constructive manner.


 * As far as the article on hymen - WOW, I'm thinking "I wish I had a button next to the "my watchlist" that said "avoid at all costs" ... LOL. I think I'd sooner try to edit the Obama article than touch that one.  Even 20 years ago I'm not sure I'd have wanted to spend too much time on that one. — Ched (talk) 06:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I mean I'd want to spend time on it... or rather ... boy this hole around my feet ankles knees just keeps getting deeper - I think I'll excuse myself while I still can - (if it's not already too late) ;) — Ched (talk) 06:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * But throwing speedies around is so much fun! runs away — Huntster (t • @ • c) 07:09, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Laffin my friggin but off now! .. ya gotta admire the timing :). Good to see ya around Huntster! — Ched (talk) 07:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Account creator
Bit switched on. :) Thanks for helping out. See WP:ACC for more information about the right. Best, Peter Symonds ( talk ) 13:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

And your account on the interface was approved. Please review WP:ACC/G prior to acting on any requests. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or ask in. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Australian spelling for Australian articles.
Please be careful when editing articles for local spelling as Australia spells different to the US. Bidgee (talk) 11:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * replied — Ched (talk) 11:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Aussie dictionary is here. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 15:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

ACC
See help desk. :) - Mgm|(talk) 11:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Page Moves
helpme (self-removed thanks to Forgettinaboutit [sic] post - plenty to read up on for the moment - may repost addendum later)

This particular "helpme" is brought to you by this post. After a royal screw-up I made on my first page move, I tended to shy away from them - but it's something I need to learn to do right - so I post this tag as self-evidence of my stupidity. Many of the page moves listed at Requested moves have a lot of "What links here" entries. After reading Help:Moving a page, I wanted to clarify what exactly I should do (or attempt to do ;)) On to the questions ...
 * 1) Do the pages listed need to stay listed for 5 days before being moved?
 * 2) After the move, must all the pages in the "What links here" listing be fixed?
 * 3) Would simply leaving a redirect behind for the old page satisfy the needs of the "What links here" entries?
 * 4) If not, is there a tool, bot, or automated script that can help in the "find and replace" work: A -> A (new) ?
 * 5) Do all pages on the "What links here" list need to be addressed, or just the indented ones?

Thanks — Ched (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hia Ched. I just got your message on my talk and while I do not have time right this second to even look at the article you refer to, I can help with this one with a quick note.


 * No, but generally they should unless there is overwhelming early consensus. Articles can be snowed and Wikipedia is not a bureacracy.
 * No, just the double redirects created. See Moving guidelines for administrators which goes into some detail on what should be done in the wake of a move and how to do it (which page I recently expanded and copyedited to make clearer).
 * 1) See above. The question is sort of a non sequitur. The need is mostly to fix double redirects.
 * 2) can't help you there, though using the method of opening up multiple tabs in your browser and doing the operations in steps I can fix multiple pages very fast manually, for example clicking "edit this page" down the line for say 20 pages, then replacing all the double redirects down the line as the next step, then entering a single edit summary down the line, and then clicking save page down the line. This is blindingly faster than doing each one as a separate operation.

All this is somewhat academic for the request you noted at the admonistrator's noticeboard because most moves listed at WP:RM can only be done by administrators.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

links
re: this edit. Hi Peripitus, First, thanks for helping clean up (mop), the article. Second: Is there a bot or script that I can run to avoid this kind of error in the future? I've seen mention of a whitelist and blacklist, but I haven't run across the lists yet. Anything to help improve my skill sets is greatly appreciated. Thanks, and have a great day/night. ;) — Ched (talk) 09:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Ched. Don't know if there is a bot/script for this but you can see what articles link to a website via this. The blacklist of links is handled by the Mediawiki namespace blacklist (can't remember where it is) and various bots. As for a list of such mirror sites, Mirrors and forks has many of the huge number that there are. Happy editing - Peripitus (Talk) 10:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool - thanks, and noted (with intent to assimilate). And the education ... just ... keeps ... on ... coming. ;) — Ched (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: page protection
It seemed to me that it would have been too big of a range to block, so page protection was probably more appropriate. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  19:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Citing Sources
Is it required to cite every source? If not, then which ones? The peer review for NIS said to cite the sources, however I don't know which ones. TechOutsider (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider
 * I'm looking at Norton Internet Security, this review, and a couple links. I'm guessing the Independent Assessment comment refers to the "Critical Reception".  But to answer the cite question, it's not so much citing ever source for a statement - but more that every statement has to have a source cited I think.  In choosing which sources to cite, I try to pick the most objective ones first, then pick the most professional looking cite from those.  I only glanced at this briefly here - but will look a little closer look tomorrow evening.  If I'm looking at the wrong pages, let me know. — Ched (talk) 05:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC) cc: to TO talk page with addendum

Collaborations
Ched, having recognized your interest in encyclopedia improvements and collaboration, I welcome your input on Tina Turner, Michael Jackson and Dutch oven (prank). When I have more interesting fare to offer I will do so. But that's the best I can do for now. Have fun. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I left a thought at the Dutch oven talk page, ... are there any particular diffs or items you're looking for as far as the Turner and Jackson articles? Both are kind of outside my areas, so I kinda need a little more than just the articles, to evaluate what kind of input you'd want. — Ched (talk) 21:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. Only if you're interested or intrigued. They both relate to how lead sentences of articles should be written. The specific issues include whether Michael Jackson should be described as a businessman in the first sentence, whether Tina Turner should be described as an icon, and more generally whether articles on musicians should all start out "John/Jane Doe is a musician from Whoville" or include some synopsis of significance and notability. The candy stick discussion has had one good benefit which is that there is some kind of Swedish type of candy like this, so I'm going to work on that now. I find the discussion amusing, it includes good faith efforts by many, and some uncompromising radicalism by others, all of which makes for a good time. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry bro. Just messing with you. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. If it isn't fun it's probably best to find another pursuit. But there are some good lads on here and it will suck you in before you know it. The silliness and the craziness are addictive. So get out if you can!!! Let me know what topics or interests you have and if I come across anything in that vein I'll let you know. And drop a note on my page any time you're working on something and I'll call out the troops to help. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy99
Hello there. I noticed that you are a member of the malware Wikiproject, and I was wondering if you'd like to help me improve an article about a virus called Happy99 which was recently nominated for deletion. Thanks. ← Spidern  →  16:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Given my recent track record, I'm not sure my getting too close to an article will help, but if I can find anything, I'll drop it off for ya. — Ched (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look asap. — Ched (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
Aymatth2, ChildofMidnight, Buster7, and of course, my fellow civil-service friend Huntster - Thank you for your kind words, and great advice. Hard part first - I was foolish to let these minor things get to me. I guess it just goes to show that even after 50+ years of life, almost 30 years of single-parenting, and 15+ years on the web, "There's no fool like an old fool". I'll put away my Don Quixote attire, pull Sancho's knife from my back, and put it in my "remember box". Boy those 5-pillar looking windmills sure looked like real monsters though. I suppose that boldness does tend to lead to some less than policy and guideline knowledgeable posting. Note to myself: When you see a train wreck a-commin' - just get off the damn train dummy. ;). Thanks guys - I really mean that! ;)  Well, there's a long-time editor here whose phrase I'll close with. "Nothing more to see here - let's move along". — Ched (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD Withdrawal
Please see my note on my talk page. Best, TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  21:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep - posted there - and withdraw or redirect on AfD posting (with explination). Anything else I should do at this point? — Ched (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron


I notice that you are part of Category:Inclusionist_Wikipedians. I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 00:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Ikip. Hmmm - to be honest, I thought I had signed up there already. I'm not an extremest at inclusion, but have salvaged a few from AfD (couple WW II bios, Study Skills, etc).  I'll stop back over though and take a look.  Thanks for the heads up. — Ched (talk) 12:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it is possible that you are already a member. (I don't see you on the membership list though) I go through great pains not to double post. But I never considered checking the already ARS membership against the list. Thanks for the idea, I guess if I would have never contacted you, you would never had seen that wonderful and hilarious User_talk:Ikip. So I guess everything worked out for the best.
 * Personally I have trouble trying to save obscure corporations and garage bands.
 * {|class="wikitable collapsible collapsed" align=center cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0" width=300px

!style="background: #cdc"| Articles tagged for deletion and rescue
 * align=center|
 * }
 * }
 * Here is the current list, I always find some article which I am really interested in. Ikip (talk) 21:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Good deal! Makes it a whole lot easier than going through 10 links to find em. It was a while ago when I found the whole deletionist vs. inclusionist stuff - I probably didn't put my name in the right place.  I'm not a radical inclusionist, but I've seen a bunch of stuff on NPP that was tagged, and I try to save what I can.  Not that I think every garage band who gets a gig at the local bar should have an article - but the stuff that's tough to research on the web - especially the historical things, are definitely of interest to me.  You can count on me to add my meager abilities to improving the lost souls (being the patron saint of lost causes that I am).. lol.  Look forward to working with ya! ;) — Ched (talk) 21:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Many of the editors of WP:ARS are not radical inclusionists either, see ARS, and I quote:
 * So the ARS are wild-eyed inclusionists?
 * No. The Article Rescue Squadron (ARS) is not about casting keep votes or making policy simply to ensure that nothing is deleted. The ARS ensure that articles about notable topics do not get deleted when they can be rescued through normal editing which per WP:AFD means that it was not a good candidate for AfD. The So fix it and Solookitup templates are sometimes all that's required for a rescue.
 * I am looking forward to working with you in the future. I know you have many skills you can add to the project. Ikip (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ched
Yo ched, I'm trying to insert a picture in a article, however it only allows me to insert it as a logo; not a screenshot for some reason. Norton Removal Tool. The picture is here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TechOutsider (talk • contribs) 20:50, 20 February 2009


 * This is likely just a cache issue. I can't seem to force it to reload, so there may be additional technical problems, but they should be automatically sorted out in time. Check back tomorrow and see if the problem is resolved, and if not, make an inquiry at Village pump (technical). I think this may have something to do with the minor server downtime that just occurred. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 03:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep; couldn't access Wikipedia for ~half an hour just now. :( TechOutsider (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider


 * So, should I continue with the edits; and the problems will the smoothed out tomorrow? TechOutsider (talk) 03:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider


 * Yeah, continue editing as normal, just don't be surprised if some images don't work as expected. Everything should be okay (or at least, I've not noticed anything else amiss). — Huntster (t • @ • c) 04:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Leave it to me to be late to my own party lol. One of my clients had a server outage (actually a switch issue) - and had major job run scheduled for today. — Ched (talk) 12:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like the IT guys working on the servers had their hands full last night. I guess while they were doing some squid updates, someone decided to update the Apache kernels, NFS goes down = fun filled evening for Brion.  But, looks like the Norton pic is displaying ok now. — Ched (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC) (note to myself - I really do need to spend more time on the #en-wiki IRC)


 * Domas posted a message on the lists, if anyone is interested. &mdash; neuro  (talk)  18:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

RfA
Sure thing. :) &mdash; neuro  (talk)  17:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Formal welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron
I love what you wrote, which is so very true: "Just call me the patron saint of lost causes." Ikip (talk) 22:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Msgj
Thanks for your support but I think you !voted twice ;) Please check, cheers. MartinMsgj 08:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You are 100% correct - sorry about that. I had bookmarked the page to vote - and missed the fact that I already had. — Ched (talk) 11:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC) (but pointing it out does indicate I voted correctly ;)) — Ched (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)