User talk:Galwhaa/Archive 2

You have been RfA'd!
I've submitted a Request for Adminship for you, with the intention of giving you the admin functions you'll need to properly administer AutoWikiBrowser. See: Requests for adminship/Mathwiz2020

SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, if you accept, please indicate so on the page above, and then add it to the WP:RFA page. SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:17, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for nominating me. I have accepted but have yet to answer all questions. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 03:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

AWB
Since you've inherited Martin's code, I would kindly make certain that you are aware of bot policies and high speed edits on the Wikipedia. Please make certain you read over Bots. Thanks! --AllyUnion (talk) 07:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for giving me the link. I know that Martin had at one point an "automatic edit" feature that edited every x seconds, but was removed due to the bot policy.  I'll make sure that I don't violate it, either. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 22:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * First of all thanks for taking over for Bluemoose on developing the autowikibrowser. Secondly, you might want to consider in future versions moving everything {including discussions} over from your user sub page to AutoWikiBrowser and related subpage including possibly the checkuser list.  I'm an admin so I can help with deletes and protects and such things like that and am more than willing to help so just leave a message on my talk page if you need anything.  Jtkiefer T  00:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I will move the AWB page to that site, and will also make WP:AWB redirect there. Thank you for the suggestion.  As for you helping me, SchuminWeb nominated me for adminship earlier today (you can vote here, but I haven't answered all questions yet).  If I become an admin, I will need your assistance.  If I don't, you and many others have offered to help me. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 03:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

adminship
Mathwiz2020, I apoligize for not investigating into your edits enough. I looked at your User page with the tag 800+ edits and based my comment on that. I am glad to see that you have 9 support votes already. Good Luck! --BrenDJ 02:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops - that figure is old. I really should update it, shouldn't I?  Well, thanks for voting for me!  (I don't know how you found my nomination - do you patrol RFA regularly, or did someone tell you?)  It's now 16 for and none against! &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 20:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

(copied from the Help Desk)
 * There is no rule on this, but if it is percieved that a candiate is in effect trying to recuit his friends to vote for him, there is likely to be a reaction. If a candidate feels that this is essential, then IMO it eould be best to word pointers neutrally, such as "I have been nominated for adminship. Perhaps you would like to express your opnion of my fitness for adminship on WP:RFA/Example" It would be even better to also leave such message on the talk pages of users with which the candidate has had neagative encounters. Whe I was nominated, i put this on my user pages, invaiting anyoen who interacted with me to comment -- and i got lots of positive comments. In general if not enough people will find there way to a person's RfA without a campaign, that says soemthing about that person's community-wide trust. DES (talk) 21:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Regex
Hi, thanks for the regex for the bad links project. However, it doesn't appear to catch the http links. I copied it straight and put it into AWB and it doesn't appear to work. See here... Transcendental meditation. Gflores Talk 02:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, actually it does work. There are just too many '\'s. \\[\\[http:\\/\\/(.*)\\]\\] -> \[\[http:\/\/(.*)\]\] . That works. However, it doesn't seem to catch these links. [Towanda Online] . Also, could it be possible to instead of having 2 separate regexes, just to have one?
 * I wrote the regexs with the intent of having them implemented directly into the AWB's code. If put in the code, the extra \ "escapes" the following ones.  Hence, it will work embedded in the AWB's code but not in the find and replace - plus, in the code, it can be two regexs.  I'll try the link you gave me, with the regexs in AWB's code. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 02:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. Thanks for the quick response! Gflores Talk 02:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I tested the program, and it does fix the Towanda link. I'll implement the fix as soon as Bluemoose e-mails me the lastest source code. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 02:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right, it does fix the Towanda link. Can you test this...

be [less than half] TSP. So even "regular" TSP found at the hardware store may be half TSP and half "TSP substitute". Savogran's brand actually contains 80% trisodium phosphate dodecahydrate. Thanks.
 * It works. &mdash; M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 02:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks for the heads up. I'll make a note of this fine program on the Bad links page. Unfortunately, we just finished the majority of the work, so we won't be able to really test it until the next dump, but I'll be sure to let you know if there are any problems. Thanks again! --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 01:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's awesome news. The amount of time this program will save will make a lot of people happy, all thanks to you and Martin. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 01:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

AWB 1.7
E-mail me the source code for the newest version (1.6.2, I presume) and I can implement all the changes I made. These include: typo fixes, added bad link repair, sorting headings at the end of articles, and a new user detect script (currently, if a user ABCD is on the "allowed" list and AB logs on, AB will be allowed - I fixed this). I can then zip the source code and send it back to you to compile and put online. &mdash; M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 02:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I checked over your additions, thanks, all good except that the external links fixer regex appears to remove pipes (" | ") from normal wiki links sometimes, try it on George W. Bush, and the section order sorter is to easily confused at the moment, mainly for the reason you point out in your email. to be honest I dont think it would be possible to do it reliably, because apart from the existing problem it would always be confused by sub headings to the various sections, which is pretty common. thanks Martin 21:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking at the Bush article, your metadata script duplicates the persondata - i.e., it appears twice. Check to make sure the replace metadata with "" works.  As for removing the pipe, I can't figure that out - it's only supposed to remove the pipe if the link begins with http://.  Finally, I don't think the subheadings will be a problem - who puts a subheading under external links, anyways?  Is was trying a script that replaced all double equals with &temp; - that is, find ([^=])==([^=]) and replace with $1&temp;$2, then sort the headings chopping at &temp;, and then replace &temp; with == but it wouldn't work. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 21:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * An idea - in private void Start, after checking the wikistatus, add a script that navigates one of the browser to an arbitrary page, e.g., the main page, and searches the HTML code for You have  .  If it finds this, an alert pops up asking you to read your messages before continuing, and then navigates the main browser to your user talk page (or the diff link provided in that message box).  This way, if someone leaves a comment, e.g., to say that one of the fixes you are applying should be stopped, the AWB doesn't let you fix anything until you read that comment. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 22:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Good spot on that meta duplication, fixed now. Unfortunately quite a lot of articles have sub headings in the external links sections, and I dont feel comfortable with something that can potentially cause damage. maybe we could have an alert that warned that the sections arent in order, then offered to try and fix it?
 * I used to have something that detected if the user had new messages, but I removed it for some reason, but actually I think you are right. I'll add it back now, thanks Martin 22:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, the alert would work, too - after all, when a long article is a stub, you only have an alert, no action. Speaking of which, you might want to make the AWB remove all stub tags in that instace.  For example, replace "\\{\\{.*?stub\\}\\}" (the non-greedy token so that it doesn't start with one template and end at another) with "". &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 22:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, thats good, but one problem, it must ignore stub templates of the form econ-stub and . Martin 22:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible to do a script such as: if (Regex.IsMatch(ArticleText, "\\{\\{(.*?)stub\\}\\}") && $1 != sect- && $1.substr(0,2) != tl) { Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "\\{\\{.*?stub\\}\\}", "") }
 * It would see if there is a stub template, then make sure it isn't sect-stub, and then make sure it isn't a tl, and then replace with nothing. The only problem is, I'm not sure if one can use the "$1" token from the previous statement in the next - that is, the $1 in the if statement is supposed to be the text in parenthesis before the word stub, but I'm not sure if it would work. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 22:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * For 1.6.3 (on the version info) - why does it say only internal? Did you remove external link fixing?  What regexs did you improve?  And, it says, "new messages cause it to check you are still an enabled user."  (1) I thought it checks you're enabled every edit (from 1.4) and (2) shouldn't it say, stops you from editing until you check your messages, not see if you're enabled?  I understand you might to check in case you remove someone from the list and send them a message, but, I think not editing at all would be better. &mdash;  M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 23:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The regex to fix external links was removing some pipes, so i havent enabled it yet. I cleaned up the large set of regexes I had done before, now much more efficient. It doesnt check you're enabled every edit (only that you are logged in) to do so would use up a lot of bandwidth. When you get a message it resets the wikistatus bool to false, meaning you can't edit anymore if your name has been removed from the user list. Martin 23:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Fixed! The second line of regex (to remove the pipes) should be:

ArticleText = Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "\\[http:\\/\\/([^[]]*?)\\|([^[]]*?)\\]", "[http://$1 $2]");
 * Check it on George W. Bush. &mdash; M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 23:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * In main.cs, where it checks to see if the article is too long to be a stub, replace the code with this and see if it works (I haven't tested the below):

if ((Regex.IsMatch(ArticleText, "[Ss]tub}}")) && (intLength > 3500)) { if (!Regex.IsMatch(ArticleText, "")) { if (!Regex.IsMatch(ArticleText, ".*[Ss]tub")) ArticleText = Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "", ""); } }
 * This should (hopefully) help with stub removal. &mdash; M ATHWIZ 20 20  T ALK 23:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I've emailed you the newest version + source, let me know what you think. Martin 16:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, this diff (at the top) demonstrates a problem that can be caused be the regex ArticleText = Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "\\[http:\\/\\/(.*)\\]\\]", "[http://$1]");, as you can see it removes a bracket when it shouldnt, can you see how this could be fixed? thanks (congrats on the rfa!) Martin 16:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * In parsers, replace the first two lines of the uneven bracket fixer with:

ArticleText = Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "\\[\\[http:\\/\\/([^][]*?)\\]", "[http://$1]"); ArticleText = Regex.Replace(ArticleText, "\\[http:\\/\\/([^][]*?)\\]\\]", "[http://$1]");
 * I also noticed that the uneven bracket fixer accidentally fixes external links of the form [], so you can remove the first line of "repair bad external links", leaving only the pipe fixer.-- M @  t  hwiz  2020  20:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks! great job once again. Martin 21:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations
Hi,, Congratulations on Becoming a Sysop Hey there. Congratulations, you've just been made a sysop! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except junk like "aojt9085yu8;3ou BOB IS GAY"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, ban anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on Votes for deletion (provided there's a consensus) for more than one week, protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.

Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! &mdash; Ilyan e  p   (Talk)  22:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)




 * Congratulations! &mdash;Kirill Lok s hin 22:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulationsand good luck! -- Mihai -talk 23:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats! -- PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on your new position! --BrenDJ 02:36, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Interwikis Alphabetization
There is no policy on interwiki order, the closest thing wew have is Language order poll, which showed the method we use to be the most popular by a substantial margin, the method used by the pywikibots is the second most popular one. Martin 22:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for supporting me on my successful RfA! It passed with a final tally of 40/9/1. If there's anything I can do to help, just ask!  Sceptr e  ( Talk  )

Your Rfa
Glad to support. Congrats! -- §  Hurricane ERIC§ archive -- my dropsonde 23:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats Mathwiz! -- a.n.o.n.y.m  t 23:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, and you're very welcome! --King of All the Franks 23:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

RE: Sensitivity boosters
FYI Author has recreated article again, after 4 deletions J\/\/estbrook   Talk  VSCA    23:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

link fixing
I'm not sure if someone else has sent this your way or not, but a few of us have been using AWB for bad link repair. The most common problem we see is that people frequently put double brackets around an external link. We've been using the following regexp for find/replace. If you wanted to include it in the general cleanup part of the AWB, I'm sure people would find it useful. find: \[\[http:\/\/(.*)\]\] replace: [http://$1] take care. --Bachrach44 03:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * This feature was added last weekend - versions 1.6.3 and up now include bad link repair, including fixing uneven bracketing, replacing pipes with spaces in external links, etc. All you have to do is check the "general fixes" box on the AWB.  If the feature doesn't seem to be working or if you want a more detailed explanation of everything that it does, just ask me.-- M  @  t  hwiz  2020  20:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Didn't realize you'd just added it - thanks. I look forward to using it when the next round of bad link repair starts, and if I have any more regegs for you I'll let you know. thanks again. --Bachrach44 02:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

grinbot
You have a reply on my talk page. --grin &#9998; 10:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Separating blue and red links
I am looking for help for a project that I am doing and I noticed that you list yourself as a computer programmer with javascript and html skills. I have left a message with the Computer help desk but have yet to receive any replies or comments. Any help you can offer would be wonderful.

I am looking for an easier way to parse and separate red and blue links at the missing encyclopedic articles project so that valid blue links can be removed and article that need to be created can be grouped together. See this edit (before and after) for the kind of work that is being done currently by hand. If you can provide assistance by writing a script or referring me to another person who might be more helpful, I would greatly appreciate it. Ideally it would sort the html and return wikisyntax that could be entered back in, though I would be grateful with anything. Thanks in advance. --Reflex Reaction (talk)&bull; 15:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll work on a script - I just need to know what format you want it to be. Do you want an addition to monobook.js, and external webpage that you visit, or a C# program - the latter will take the most time, as I'm new to C#, but, in my opinion, will be the best option.-- M  @  t  hwiz  2020  20:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks like someone beat you to the punch, but I still am not sure how to actually run the thing, so any more comments would be really appreciated. --Reflex Reaction (talk)&bull; 20:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'm not familiar with Perl, so I can't help you here. -- M @  t  hwiz  2020  20:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Emailed source code. take care Martin 19:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Episodes of Lost (season 2) Talk Page
User 162.83.74.104 AKA Heyer8472 keeps on reverting my edits and his edits on the page, and he even deleted a friendly note I left on his User_talk:162.83.74.104. I'm unfamiliar with how to handle this type of situation. Is he in violation with the 3RR? He's obviously not being very civil about the situation and is reverting and deleting edits even after being told not to. Any help you could provide here would be appreciated. Thanks. Jtrost 21:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey its me Heyer8472 I love the show and all i ever wanted to do was get the facts straight. I sorry if i offended you or anyone else. I am not hostile or evil. I am just a nice regular person who loves this show that's all heyer8472

Closing AFDs
Hi Mathwiz2020, I noticed you speedy-deleted some articles and commented on the AFD without closing them. I closed the ones I saw. Remember to close :) &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-14 01:49Z 
 * Sorry about that - I'll remember to close them in the future! -- M @  th  wiz  2020  01:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Cheers :) &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-14 06:36Z 

Thanks for the tip
In the future, I'll remember what you said about CFDs

CG janitor 02:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Firefox 1.5.0.1
In this edit, you changed the latest preview release to 1.5.0.1. Can you please provide a source for this? Until then, I have reverted you changes. Thanks! -- M @  th  wiz  2020  23:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It was announced http://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/index.php/2006/01/03/18011501-code-freeze-approaching/
 * It is listed under releases on the mozilla server http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/
 * It is avalable to download on betanews.com http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Mozilla_Firefox_for_Windows/1032985422/1
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toehead2001 (talk • contribs)
 * Thanks for clarifying this! In the future, though, when you update the version, leave a link to one of your sources in the edit summary box if you can. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  14:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hide userboxes
''How do you hide your userboxes? I can't find anything in the Wikicode or the HTML source for the page. Thanks! -- M @  th  wiz  2020  18:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)''
 * It is a rather unusual and barely used code:

[Header text] [Content you want hidden]
 * I hope that helps! Ian13ID:540053 19:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

 * Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia!--TheCat&#39;sMeow 15:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I tried your sugestion, and that's a great idea! I like it! -- τнєÇάťş Mξόω♀  17:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for the welcome message--OnwardsCS 15:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't know that template would do that--OnwardsCS 16:10, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Re:Speedying RfD articles
I'm aware of that. It's just that at the time, there was no AfD page (it was redlinked), so I thought that the person had used AfD instead of speedy by mistake. enochlau (talk) 22:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Paul Jaworski
Did you look at the article that was originally deleted, which was nonsense about some guy born in 1989 and the article you deleted. I was going to delete the original article but Academic Challenger beat me to it. However, the recreated article was about a man who was the first armored car robber. A completly different article and one that seems valid with a reference. Will you consider undeleting it or I can. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for restoring that. To a certain extent it was the fault of a new user for creating a nonsense article in the first plcae. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

CONtort
Hi Math, thanks for speedying this bit of vandalism. Are you also going to take care of the orphaned images the user uploaded? Please let me know if you need any assistance. Thanks, Johntex\talk 20:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Chiens Sans Frontiers
You speedied this as "unverifiable blogcruft", which is not among the WP:CSDs. The deletion is currently being overturned on WP:DRV. Please don't stretch (or, in this case, invent) the CSDs to suit; it makes it much harder to defend them against those who would abolish them altogether as being too dangerous. Thanks. -Splash talk 04:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

More speedies
Hi there. With reference to some of your speedy deletions, I am concerned that you are not implementing the CSDs as they are written. In addition to the one above, you speedied several as "advertising", which appears nowhere on WP:CSD, although spam is vandalism. But note that both A6 and WP:VAND have a strong reliance on external links in that case. It is better to leave such articles to AfD. I get the impression that you looked through AfD for things to speedy: it is better to look in CAT:CSD and leave AfD to its work. I have restored the following articles and reopened their AfDs, since they were, imo, considerably out-of-process as speedies:


 * Tim Storms, has a very clear assertion of notability, and that is easily enough to save it from A7
 * Libyan Arab Airways Flight 388, hoaxes are not and never have been a speedy criterion

These I restored without taking them to AfD, since they had never been thus tagged:


 * Dipak C. Jain, being dean of a Grad School is an obvious assertion of notability. It is for AfD to decide if it is sufficient.
 * Phexin. This was not deleteable under any CSD, and simply needed to made into a redirect as I have now done. I've restored the history behind it, as it is perfectly legitimate.

Note that there were very many others that, if challenged on WP:DRV would be overturned. The only reason I have not restored them is because they have almost no chance on AfD: that is expressly not a reason to speedy things. Please tread carefully, and do take another look through WP:CSD. Thanks. -Splash talk 04:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice. I have read through the criteria on WP:CSD and I do often use CAT:CSD rather than looking through AfD for speedies.  However, since advertising is listed on WP:NOT and does not meet WP:CORP coporporation notibility guidelines, I thought that they could be speedied.  As for Tim Storms, a Google search provides only Wikipedia, Answers.com (which gets its data from Wikipedia dumps), and a few not trustworthy websites to prove the claim that he is in Guiness.  No sources were cited, either, so I thought he was not notable and the article was deletable under CSD A7.  As for Jain, only one person edited it before it was speedied, only one page linked to it, and the article was one line with no links.  The Phexin article provided no context and very little content.  These are both CSD criteria.  As for the airplane flight, I could not find any sources in a Google search, making it non-verifiable. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  20:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Please note that being non-verifiable is not a reason to speedy delete. Please look through some of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. In general please interpret the WP:CSD page strictly and narrowly. For example, a claim of notability, even if not supported on a google search, is generally held to prevent an A7 speedy. Aside from the limited scope of A7, lack of notability is not a speedy reason. DES (talk) 20:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll interpret the guidelines more strictly in the future. Thanks for letting me know! -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  20:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. As I figure you've worked out now, being something in WP:NOT does not create speedies; the articles must explicitly meet one of the (very narrow) CSDs. Also, A7 (nnbio) only requires an assertion of notability. Now I personally allow myself some leeway on what I will accept: the plainly ridiculous I will not. But a Guiness world record? That's a bit much to dismiss as no assertion &mdash; if you had to Google for it, then it should have gone to AfD where others can check your Googling and do more research, just in case. I don't understand why the features you describe in the Jain article would make anything speediable. I have written full articles that only I have edited and which have a single other link &mdash; that in no way reduces their value, and no such article should be summarily deleted. Phexin provided enough content and context for me to work out what to do with it, as a complete non-expert, so it was not a speedy. As DES has pointed out, there is definitely no case for "non verifiable" being a speedy &mdash; verification is one of the principal tasks for AfD, even if it isn't very good at it sometimes. With that all borne in mind, you can see why I said a number of your other speedies were very questionable: they might be WP:NOT, but that doesn't render them immediately deleteable. Unfortunately, many things that get tagged by well-meaning editors actaully have to go through AfD, so just having a tag isn't a license to delete. -Splash talk 21:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Under the guidelines above, would Aaron's Postulate of Numerical Relevance and Anthropithicus, both listed on CAT:CSD under G1, patent nonsense, be speediable? They are not verifiable, yet, in my opinion, are not nonsense either and I cannot find any other criteria under which they fit.  They both, to me, are obviously vanity articles writen by Aaron and Corey, respectively, but, as unverifiable articles are not speediable, should I instead list them under AfD? -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  22:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me get this straight - Some Photos of Newfields, NH and Sourabh are tagged for CSD and both meet WP:NOT (repository of images and dictionary, respectively) and someone tagged Soulescape and Soulescape.com as CSD with a reason of "advertisement". So, none of these are speediable, but should instead be AfD'd, correct? -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  22:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The first one is certainly speediable. Patent nonsense, of the second kind: understandable, but without meaning. The second is the kind of thing that I view as a joke article, which WP:VAND defines as vandalism, and vandalism can be removed on sight (or via CSD G3). The third is not a speedy, even though it is, at present, a thing that WP:NOT. The fourth does appear to be an nn-bio on reading it a couple of times, so that's ok, even though it masquerades as a dicdef. The two Soulscape articles, well, one is already on AfD and should be left there, since advertising is not a speedy (sometimes an ad can be salvaged is the reason) and the other redirected to it for now. The redirect will be removed if the AfD closes as a delete. However, when an article about a website sounds highly promotional, it is sometimes because it is a copyvio from its subject, which provides a means for either blanking it with {copyvio}, or, if the source is a commercial content provider, it is a speedy. -Splash talk 22:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I was going through AfD, voting on various articles. One of the closed listings caught my attention - Articles for deletion/Smoky's Fine Cigars.  The comments included "speedy delete [as] blatant advertising, non-notable", "speedy delete [as] spam", and "speedy delete [as] nn advertising".  User:Mushroom then deleted it under CSD A7, non-notable people or groups.  First of all, a product is not a person or group.  Second of all, non-notable, spam, and advertising are not criteria for speedy deletion.  Should I list this under deletion review?  Thanks. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  20:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hm. I'm not very happy with those speedies. In order:
 * Articles for deletion/Smoky's Fine Cigars &mdash; is borderline outright spam, but most certainly not an A7, and so the premise for deletion was very inaccurate. It probably doesn't have a prayer if restored, but, unfortunately that's not a reason for deletion. My guess is that WP:DRV, if asked, would keep it deleted. Maybe not though. People need to be reminded that AfD doesn't get to invent case-by-case new CSDs.
 * Articles_for_deletion/Gfxvoid was an invalid speedy and should be overturned. Either via deletion review, or on your own authority, with a note to the deleting admin.
 * Articles_for_deletion/Sanchez_Raful_Sicard_&_Polanco was an unacceptable speedy, but a very good AfD case. This should simply be reversed, and deletion review would certainly overturn it.
 * I'm usually in favour of taking such things to Deletion review (or the admin's talk page, but DRV can be quicker to give a mandate if they are offline). It wouldn't need 5 days &mdash; you might collect a few "speedy undelete"s in a matter of minutes or hours. But, when I see something very obviously wrong, I'm ok with fixing it myself, although I am not an IAR type. This is because sometimes the best course is to re-open the AfD debate quickly so that there is no need to do a full-blown relisting. I may take a look through Mushroom's log a little later once I've caught up with the rest of my talkpage... -Splash talk 21:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Wootton
Thanks for finding the source for the nickname. All the search results I got when I tried to find it were for other sites hosting Wikipedia content. Since I couldn't, I deleted it, thinking it was just someone adding a silly comment, an inside joke, about the school because of its Asian population. Now I see the sad truth that it is nicknamed that for exactly that reason. Oh well, thanks again for finding that.--Metros232 02:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Welcome Code
Hi Mathwiz, I was wondering whether I can use your welcoming code. Do I just add the code to my User:Username.usergreeter.js. If so, how do I use it from then on. Thanks a lot.  D a Gizza Chat  &#169; 03:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Installing the user welcomer involves two steps.

//Greets new users using navigation pop-ups //Created by User:Lupin for User:Mathwiz2020 //http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lupin&diff=31909388&oldid=31878221 document.write(' ');
 * 1) Install navigation popups as per the instructions on the provided page.
 * 2) Add the following code to your monobook.js file (that is, User:DaGizza/monobook.js) in addition to navigation popups:
 * That's it! When you hover over any user name, after the popup appears, wait a moment and a link will appear that says "greet (name)".  Just a tip, but if you set the following popup options (see the main popup page for details), the script will work better:


 * I hope you enjoy the tool! -- M @  th  wiz  2020  20:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The Hunting Party
Mathwiz -- as a frequent contributor to the Lost pages (and active Wikipedia editor), I just wanted to make you aware that a user, Heyer8472, is continually making edits to the Lost Episode Guide that are contrary to the MoS in regards to tone and style, not to mention his (or her) numerous spelling mistakes. I have reverted much of the edits back to a grammatically correct version. He (or she) is also including slight examples of OR and is including multiple unnecessary details. Thanks! Danflave 17:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I am aware of the problem. In fact, I previously blocked Heyer8472 (see the message at the top of his talk page).  I am dealing with the problem, but thanks for bringing it to my attention.  One more note - do not revert any one page more than three times within a 24-hour period, else you will be blocked under WP:3RR.  I know you want to contribute to Wikipedia, but multiple reversions could indicate an edit war, and admins (such as me) are supposed to treat and punish all sides equally, even if one was just trying to better Wikipedia and the other was not. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  20:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you -- I was concerned about 3RR, so I did want to talk with you about it. Danflave 20:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

TJHS
I only blanked that section (not the whole page) because I didn't really think that the discussion was relevant to the article. Do you disagree? -J Train

Thanks for the welcome!
This thank-you is a little late in coming, but thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia! --Lph 21:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Signatures
Your comments on WP:DRV are articulate and well-made. Thank you for helping to keep the abuse of the speedy-deletion process in check. Your signature, however, is really hard to look at. If I asked very nicely, would you consider toning down the colors? Sorry I'm such a stick-in-the-mud. Rossami (talk) 22:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Go to User:Mathwiz2020/sandbox and edit my signature. When you get a version you like, just leave me a message and I'll consider it.  I would do this myself, but it would probably still be too colorful. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  23:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Draft attempted. You've been more patient than my comment deserved.  Rossami (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've changed my signature to make the "@" orange. Now that I look at the newer version, I can see that it is better and glares less.  Thanks for bringing this up - I don't mind!  It's a very minor price to pay, especially considering I could just use the standard signature (Mathwiz2020).  As for the patience, I just like contributing to Wikipedia and if there's anything I can do to help improve it, be it welcoming new users or reviewing deleted pages, I'll do it.  Thanks, too, for your 10,000+ contributions to Wikipedia over almost three years.  It is the truly dedicated such as you who keep Wikipedia from collapsing, and making it even better than Britannica. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  01:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Lovran.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Lovran.gif. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --OrphanBot 12:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:WestatEhrlich.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:WestatEhrlich.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 03:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed wording for "Wikipedia is not a fan site"
Hi, Mathwiz,

As promised for quite a while, I've cleaned up the proposal material, and put it up for pre-posting at: User_talk:Leflyman/Not_a_Fansite. Please take a look at the proposed wording; you may also want to review the comments when I first brought it up on the talk page for What Wikipedia is not in November, which I've copied to the bottom of my "sub-page". Let me know what you think! —LeFlyman 19:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

can't speedy-delete
Hi! Thanks for your ref WP:CSD on Articles for deletion/Krish seenauth. However, from the article (A7), cause for speedy-delete can include: "Unremarkable people or groups. An article about a real person, group of people, band or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead." Was my error procedural? The article certainly seems to fit this critera. Thanks! Zen611 04:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry - my mistake, it can be speedied. Soon after becoming an admin, I was chastised for speedying articles under criteria such as "non-notable" and "advertisement" - while they are both listed under WP:NOT, they are not under WP:CSD.  I, in turn, have passed that lesson on to others.  After reading your comment, "Speedy delete - 5 (Google) hits, 4 unique", I mistakenly thought that you wanted to speedy it based on non-notability.  Yes, it can be speedied under CSD A7 - in fact, I just did!  Thanks for pointing that out, though, and sorry for the delay in my response - I have been short on time all weekend long. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  21:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your positive feedback. I'll reference the paragraph in the future. Zen611 19:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Instead of referencing the paragraph with a name, you can always use abbreviations. For example, if something is speediable under the "general" category's first bullet, you can write "speedy deleted per CSD G1."  Images is I, articles A, etc.  And I'll try not to make my mistake again in the future, either! -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  22:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Speedying articles on AfD
Hi - you wrote: ''You recently speedied Evil Dogfish Productions, which was listed on AfD. However, while the speedy was perfectly valid, you did not close the AfD vote.'' Hm. Must've forgotten to do that - sorry (I usually do close them when speedying). Grutness...wha?  23:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

RE: Tagging images as no license
You recently tagged an image that I uploaded as having no license. The no license template states you should leave image name tag on the talk page of the uploader. Even though the image was on my watchlist, please do so in the future. Thanks! -- M @  th  wiz  2020  21:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that, I normally check if the user is stilla round and let them know. I must have gotten sloppy. It seems that with 95% of untagged images the uploader is no longer an active wikipedian. With regards to the actual picture, does it fall under the US government PD license? --Martyman- (talk) 21:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The status of Maryland state government images is not mentioned on wikipedia's image tagging page. I would assume it is actually under copyright and not in the public domain. DO you have reason to think otherwise? --Martyman- (talk) 21:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I know - I get sloppy sometimes while doing such repetitive tasks en masse. As for the picture, I used to be extremely active in school articles, and I, one day, decided to take a USGS aerial photo of the school and upload.  That sparked a whole slew of controversy with the end result being that USGS aerial photos are PD - they even have their own tag, too!  (Moreover, most school articles now include them.  I think that if I wasn't so arrogant about all other articles copying me, I would have left Wikipedia - of course, I have better reasons for staying now that I'm a devoted Wikipedian.)  Anyways, that debate kind of made me fearful of tagging images, so I don't get involved in that stuff.  I don't see any fitting category under WP:IT - could you please take a look and see what you think?  The source page doesn't have a copyright notice at the bottom, but is that enough to avert deletion?  Thanks for all your help, both with this image and with tagging images in general! -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  21:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * From what I can tell some states in the US release their works as public domain (like the Federal Government), while most retain copyright. By teh fact that both the montgomery public schools page and the montgomery county pages are marked copyrigthed I assume they do have copyright protection in Maryland. I am not sure of the copyright rules in the US (I'm Australian), but in Australia is automatic and does not have to be claimed. If this is the case in the US I would guess it needs to be deleted. I notice it isn't actually used in any articles in the first place though, (I think that is why I slipped up and didn't check if you where around). It is now fully accepted on wikipedia that any work of the Federal government is in the public domain, well done on getting the USGS stuff through. --Martyman- (talk) 21:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for clarifying this! I've speedied it under G7, rather than waiting for I5. -- M  @  th  wiz  2020  21:43, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. --Martyman- (talk) 21:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

my rfa
thanks for your support on my rfa i appriciate it :)Benon 12:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)