User talk:Fetchcomms/Archive 15

Please use this to leave me a new message:

Re
Tyw7 (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 18:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

re
I just don't want to get into trouble about it and I wince at a warning. --Tyw7 (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 22:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you honestly think anyone is going to yell at you for ... editing the sandbox? I mean, seriously. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  22:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I once saw an editor get a warning for clearing the sandbox :/ --Please leave me a if you reply here. Thanks, Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 23:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For heaven's sake, it's a warning. If you're afraid of doing something wrong, you're violating WP:BOLD (and that's wrong!). At any rate, your question could have easily been answered by yourself had you bothered simply to look at the history of the sandbox page. I think people have told you this before: try to figure something out yourself first instead of just asking for help. That's the difference between an active learner and a passive one. I hope you'll become the former and not stay the latter. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  23:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

 * I signed up. This means I won't get another reminder, right? :) / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the project...And no not for a while. LOL, Sorry I didn't realize I put one here twice, sorry bout that. --Kumioko (talk) 04:22, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

 * Replied :) / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You have an answer :) --Kudpung (talk) 04:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

New Years Message for WikiProject United States
With the first of what I hope will be monthly newsletters I again want to welcome you to the project and hope that as we all work together through the year we can expand the project, create missing articles and generally improve the pedia thought mutual cooperation and support. Now that we have a project and a solid pool of willing members I wanted to strike while the iron is hot and solicite help in doing a few things that I believe is a good next step in solidifiing the project. I have outlined a few suggestions where you can help with on the projects talk page. This includes but is not limited too updating Portal:United States, assessing the remaining US related articles that haven't been assessed, eliminating the Unrefernced BLP's and others. If you have other suggestions or are interested in doing other things feel free. I just wanted to offer a few suggestions were additional help is needed. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, comments or suggestions or you can always post something on the projects talk page. If you do not want to recieve a monthly message please put an * before your name on the members page.--Kumioko (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Indef Full protect on Zeba
Hi Fetchcomms. I was recently reviewing a list of pages that are indefinitely fully protected in case any could be unprotected per the third pillar. I came across Zeba which it looks like you protected in September to stop an edit-war by suspected socks. As it's been a couple of months, I was wondering if we could lower protection on this page. I know we have to be careful around WP:BLP, so perhaps we could give this a try on semi-protect and follow-up with sockpuppet investigations of suspected socks if they continue to vandalize? Your call. I'm not an admin so feel free to reduce as you see fit. Bringing this here as opposed to WP:RFPP since you're the protecting admin and may have to do less research to get back up to speed. Hope you're having a great day! -- Gnowor TC 23:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah, definitely; I put it on semi for a month. I totally forgot about that somehow ... thanks for telling me! (Probably should have just set it for a few months :P.) / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:26, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Email
Sumsum2010 ·T ·C ·Review me! 04:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Statistics
You see, I have actually checked that page before, but I simply didn't find the data I was looking for, though it was quite in evidence. I should pay more attention next time. Thank you very much! Victão Lopes I hear you... 17:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Your recent Revision Deletion at AN/I
I looked up what RD5 was as I'd never seen an RD5 before when it appeared in my watchlist. In doing so I noted RD5 says "It is important that the underlying reason for deletion be made clear in the log summary." Thought I should bring this to your attention as you didn't do so. Dpmuk (talk) 00:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but disclosing the specific reason here would make the whole point of the deletion I did pointless. (It's been oversighted now, at any rate, so you can assume that it was a valid deletion.) I chose RD5 in this case purposely because it's vague. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * From the e-mail I had from the other person who did RD5 deletions about the same time I now understand why it was done (assuming yours was for the same reason). Ironically by using RD5 you brought attention to the deletion, the exact opposite of your intent (and indeed the intent mentioned at WP:REVDEL) as I've never seen it used before and it specifically states to include your reason in the log.  For that reason can I suggest you use something else in future - perhaps RD3 as an attempt at outing could certainly be seen as disruptive and given the number of RD3s it would probably not be noticed.  I'd also suggest that now it has been oversighted telling me a more specific reason (e.g. because of outing) is now perfectly reasonable as no one can see it - although obviously I wouldn't expect actual details.  I find it worrying that you wouldn't go even that far after oversight as I think RevDel isn't transparent enough as it and is being used inconsistently.  Failure to discuss reasons is not going to help in this respect. Dpmuk (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm perfectly allowed to err on the side of caution, per policy. If I don't feel comfortable telling you right now, perhaps it's due to some other reason you aren't realizing? Like, DFTT, or that fact that anyone who had a cached version of their watchlist open still may still have seen the material. In the future, it might be best to not go for transparency and just discuss this privately. What if someone else who was all for "transparency" decided to drop in here and post too many details they saw before the deletion, without realizing what they were doing? I understand your concerns but please, assume the worst case scenario first, next time? / ƒETCH COMMS  /  13:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Layout
On both vector and monobook your talk page runs off below the bottom of the viewable screen and I have to use "edit" in order to read it. Is this happening to anyone but me? I appreciate that you've put a lot of work into the HTML/CSS code of the page and it looks nice but it is a hassle to read and navigate. There's also a white bar at the top of the screen, but I suppose that those using a white background won't notice it. 3 ¢ soap Talk/Contributions 00:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It was designed for Vector, but I thought I made it work for Monobook as well. For me, the page reasons normally under Monobook other than the white bars, which are invisible in Vector. I think the problem is the positioning of the bottom white bar; it covers up the bottom with HotCat disabled, and I'm guessing your resolution is the other part of it. Let me see if I can tweak it a bit or just remove that code (meant to cover up HotCat :P). Thanks for telling me—I tried to catch all these things before but I only had access to a limited number of screen sizes. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, could you check it again? I cut the height of the bar and padded the bottom a bit. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Now it looks normal on Monobook but still has the white bar covering up text on Vector. This is on IE and Firefox 3.6, under both accounts (soap and 3centsoap). 3 ¢ soap Talk/Contributions 01:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This is so weird. I changed the format a bit again, does it work now? / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It does now, yes. Thanks. 3 ¢ soap Talk/Contributions 22:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy Tenth anniversary of Wikipedia!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000000; background-color:#aa9944; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

 WAYNE  SLAM has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 17:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)  WAYNE  SLAM 17:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

10 years
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000000; background-color:#aa9944; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

→ ♠ Gƒoley ↔ <font color="maroon" face="Papyrus">Four ♣ ← has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 19:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Happy 10th birthday lustre, Fetchcomms. → ♠ Gƒoley ↔ <font color="maroon" face="Papyrus">Four ♣ ← 19:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Deconstructivism
Thanks for noticing that. I added it to the list now. Cheers, --Elekhh (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

this place better
You wrote something.

A more general "response to the 2011 Tucson shooting" article might be appropriate, though. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 20:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Barack_Obama_speech_at_Tucson_memorial"

I think you put it in the wrong place. Suggest moving the comment to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Public_reactions_to_the_Giffords_assassination_attempt because that is the proper forum for your comment. Up to you. Madrid 2020 (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I put it in the right place. I was saying that, while an article on just the speech is not appropriate, including the speech in a "reactions to ..." page would work. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  21:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello
Hi Fetchcomms. I hope you are doing well, as am I. Do you think you have any time to look over Manoj-Babli honour killing case and give me any suggestions? After the GAN, I plan to bring this article to FA. I hope that you can give me some guidance. Codedon (talk) 19:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Quick skim:
 * Image is fine, you can tell the GAN reviewer that. ✅
 * What is Babli's full name, or do we not know this? (I mean, is Babli her last name or first name? Is Manoj a first name or last name? Unless they share the same last name due to marriage or something else, use the last name to refer to them.) Maybe also put the pic at the top.
 * Order refs ("[72][73][71]" to "[71][72][73]", etc.). ✅
 * "Appeal" section is very short, either expand it or merge it with another section.
 * Make sure the refs are consistent; e.g. ref 38 has no work (The Tribune should be the work and "The Tribune Trust" should be the publisher) while refs 33 and 35 from the same website do have both publishers and works. However those are backwards; work is the name of the news org (The Tribune) and publisher should be "The Tribune Trust" per the website, not "Tribune Company".
 * Most of the issues are already mentioned the GAN page.
 * I don't know how close this is to FA because I don't have time to do a full review, but you might want to watch out for the little details. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  19:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much, Fetchcomms, for your valuable comments. I'm going to have a lot of work to do now! Codedon (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation
Mono (talk) 03:21, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

PPI Research Update
First, thanks Fetchcomms, I am in awe of the work the assessment team did for this project. The results from the quantitative metric assessments were amazing, really. Check out what your work shows about Wikipedia article quality - I think it’s exciting, but you’ve probably figured out by now that I’m a bit of a nerd. A summary is posted on the Assessment page and a report will be on the Outreach wiki.

Second, I wanted to ask if you haven’t done many assessments on the Student post articles, to please do a couple; articles toward the bottom have only 1 or none assessments. I know some of the material is pretty dry, but this assessment is the most important one for the fall semester and this assessment will be the primary method of showing article quality to the project grant funder. So please do a couple if you possibly can. HUGE Thanks - ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 07:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public reactions to the Giffords assassination attempt
I particularly liked your argument here (it seems the best solution raised by anyone, so far) - I'm not sure how heavily involved in editing the content in question you are, but I have suggested that people take this as a starting point. Ironholds (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really involved much in the shooting-related article(s) but thanks for liking it :) If I had some time, I'd try to work on a new article but real life is giving me a headache right now, so I can't really do much. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:52, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Mohamed Bouazizi
Thanks so much for using the Reflinks tool on this article and showing it to me. I was pretty daunted thinking about using wikicite to fix all those references. You really saved the day for me. Thanks again. Glennconti (talk) 05:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Bot updates to the Architecture Bulletin
Hi Fetchcomms, certainly the update task could be done by a bot. This probably would be a new task, since what is included in the Article alerts is candidacy not achievement. But I am also open to a discussion regarding the content of the bulletin. certainly the bot would need to be quite specific. Right now the WikiProject seems to be extremely sleepy, so improvements in this area haven't been a major priority for me, but I welcome any initiative. Ah, and belated happy birthday btw. :) --Elekhh (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

CP
Hi. :) Just noticed your comment here and wanted to let you know that article listed at WP:SCV are incorporated at CP and thus aren't usually listed separately. This one was incorporated at Copyright problems/2011 January 14. (It's a bit backlogged yet!) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry—I thought I looked through that page but must have missed it. Thanks for dropping me a note! / ƒETCH COMMS  /  18:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hypsibema missouriensis
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   18:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello
I haven't seen you recently at en-help so I came here to say hello. I hope all is well. Cheers  My 76 Strat  03:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm OK, but just been really busy working on other stuff :( I'll see if I can drop in IRC sometime soon. Regards, / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 28 January 2011
Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to, who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by , with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to, who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, , who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

__NONEWSECTIONLINK__