User talk:Cynical/Archive 5

You are still listed on the Admin coaching request page
Your name is still listed at Requests for an admin coach. If you are no longer looking for a coach, or you currently have one, please remove yourself from that list. Thank you. Th e Tr ans hu man ist  00:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't actually been allocated a coach yet, but since the chances of being allocated one 6 months later are presumably small, I've withdrawn my name anyway. Cynical 20:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply post for your blog entry about dupe items on planets
Feedback on http://www.davidarussell.co.uk/2007/03/26/to-brag-or-not-to-brag

Re: "I have no idea why PW took every Wikimedia-related post I have ever made and displayed them with today’s datestamp"

I'm guessing it's because of the updated field in the ATOM feed, e.g.: - published: 2006-04-03T11:11:32Z

updated: 2007-03-27T00:12:25Z -

I've seen other planets do the same thing. You could maybe try the RSS feed for your blog instead, as it only seems to have this date-related field:

pubDate: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:40:04 GMT

(i.e. the publication date).

Also, we're carrying your feed on http://open.wikiblogplanet.com/, hope that this is okay, but if it's not, please send me a quick email & I'll get it removed (or you can edit the config file directly).

If you want, you try changing the feed to RSS on wikiblogplanet, by editing this Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nickj/open-wikiblogplanet-config.ini and then change your feed URL from "atom" at the end, to "rss" at the end (i.e. use: http://www.davidarussell.co.uk/category/wikimedia/rss ) - if this stops the problem with duplicate posts, then you can ask the Planet Wikimedia folks to do the same thing.

-- All the best, Nickj (t) 00:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

P.s.: I tried to post the reply above on your blog, but I got this error when I tried to save it: "Fatal error: Invalid API key. Please obtain one from http://wordpress.com/api-keys/ in /home/davidaru/public_html/textpattern/lib/txplib_misc.php(512) : eval'd code on line 114" (which is why I have left it here instead, hope that's okay)


 * Thanks for the suggestion. Since Textpattern's RSS feed (v 0.92) is pretty useless, I've started serving the aggregator an RSS 2 feed (which has the pubDate field you mentioned) by using Feedburner to convert the Atom feed, and then redirecting (in my htaccess) aggregators to that. Should solve the problem (in theory!)

Thanks also for letting me know about that error message, it was an Akismet plugin I had installed for Textpattern, which was evidently not working. Cynical 11:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

my lorraine kelly edit.
i can post a link on wikipedia to the pictures if you want, but they're pornographic! that's the only way i can provide a source for the info. can you please reinstate that edit, it's factual but to post a link would be irresponsible. you know what i mean? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.95.102.32 (talk) 07:06, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
 * You might have porno pictures that 'prove' your allegation, but porn is not a reliable source as required by Wikipedia policy. For reasons of accuracy (and for the not-insignificant legal reasons) Wikipedia has to be very strict about potentially-defamatory statements about living people. If you can find a reliable source (a newspaper, for example) which backs it up then add it back in, but a porno picture that in your opinion looks like the person isn't good enough, sorry. Cynical 11:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

i'll tell you, what, i can post a link here to the pics. how about that, hmm? the pics are lorraine kelly, it's fact, not opinion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)
 * I am not questioning your integrity. I'll take your word for it that you have porno pics which 'prove' what you are saying. But even if they do, porno pics are not a good enough source. You still need to find a newspaper, or other reliable source, to back up your claims. Cynical 17:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to StarForce
Could you explain to me why you changed "illegal" to "unauthorised"? I'm not angry or anything, it's just that the two seem to say the exact same thing to me in the context of the article. crazyviolinist 23:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well there are a number of situations in which use of the download source could be legal - for example countries which allow purchasers of software to keep a backup copy (provided they don't break any DRM). It is better to simply be descriptive (it is unauthorised - fact, but whether or not it is illegal depends on the individual downloader and his/her local laws). In the same way we use 'suicide bomber' or 'kidnapper' instead of 'terrorist' because it is better to simply describe the subject to the reader, rather than attempting to make judgements of our own. PS: Apologies for the delayed reply, I am not very active on Wikipedia at the moment Cynical 04:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for clarifying this. crazyviolinist 01:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

RFA
Are you still interested in the administrative tools? I was looking over your original nomination, and thought that perhaps some of the concerns there had been addressed. If you no longer feel a need/have an interest, that's fine, but I thought I'd touch base and check in with you. Cheers. -- nae'blis 16:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I would still be interested in administrative tools, however it might be better to wait a month or so as due to exams I'm not very active on Wikipedia at the moment (my exams are this month, so after that I should be back). Thanks. Cynical 15:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I'll check back around June 1 then, or just drop me a line. -- nae'blis 17:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:FlashGet.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:FlashGet.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 09:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)