User talk:Huntster/Archive 15

= 2009, April =

33
didn't know if you'd be interested in this thread or not. If you've walked away from the whole thing, forget I mentioned it. Also noticed the WP:SIG post, maybe nobody has pointed him to that particular guideline before? I only noticed because I look to see from time to time if you've been able to edit more than a few minutes here and there. I keep hoping that things are getting better for you, miss seeing you around. Hope life get better and better for you my friend. ;) — Ched : ?  02:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey I'm not sure if it's appropriate, if it is: Happy Easter - if not: Happy "Just another day". ;) — Ched : ?  21:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I'm not sure if the editor truly wants to be a wikipedian or not yet.  I guess we'll find out when he/she returns from their block.  Either way, I do appreciate you looking in on me, and all your efforts to improve both wikipedia, and real life.  Best wishes buddy! ;) — Ched :  ?  12:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh .. been meaning to mention something too. Even though you don't hang out at the XfD stuff a lot, it looks like the AfD process has gone from 5 days to 7 days.  Kind of flew under the radar a bit, so I just thought I'd mention that there was a long thread on the AfD talk page that discussed that little tit-bit. — Ched :  ?  12:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)


 * (note: I hadn't noticed that "no snow" clause at the time I wrote the post above) ;) — Ched : ?  05:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

merging templates
I suggest to merge Template:YouTube user with Template:External media Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Susan Boyle
My edits to the susan boyle article are based on sources provided in the article. I have added links. She indeed had suffered learning dissabilities, due to oxygen deprivation, and was teased because of that, according to her own story, and so clearly it is not an insult to add that information. Could you please check the references instead of threatening; if you disagree with something, describe why you think something is not appropriate for biography and how does entering facts, admitted by the person violate rules (if it does). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxodon (talk • contribs) 23:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Please cease adding insults and inappropriate personal comments to the article Susan Boyle. Opinions and unsourced statements in biographical articles are strictly prohibited, and you will be blocked if you continue. If you have any questions, please leave a note here or on my talk page. Thanks. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * These are neither insults, nor are they "unsourced statements". I have provided links. I find your threatening tone very inappropriate!!!


 * You did not add any sources to your additions (or indicate that sources already present covered your material) and your wording was not neutral in all of your edits, which typically indicates personal commentary or vandalism. I apologise if this was not the case. If sources exist, that's fine, but in the future, please make sure that all primary statements in biographical articles are sourced. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * She has declared (very clearly): "I am 47". Why do you want to make her older? Thanks.--Enzino (talk) 00:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The episode was, as I understand, recorded in January. The source, which is hours old, reports her as 48. I'm using the most recent source, since she may well have had a birthday in the interum. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ched
(from Ched's page) AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, I can't deal with the pace of editing over at the Boyle article anymore! I just tried to clean up several citations and vandalism, and in the the few minutes I was working, there must have been 30 more edits! *cries*

Anyway, how are ya? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * HUNTSTER!!! hey buddy -- how ya doin? ... yep ... I noticed that you can't get a word in edgewise over at that article. I'll die down soon enough I'd think though.  I'm looking forward to maybe working on it in the future though.  lots of material and all.  Soooo good to see you have time to drop a line too.  So much to catch up on.  I'm gonna be heading down through TN here in early May, any pics you'd like me to take while I'm on tour? — Ched :  ?  00:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Lol, I dunno, depends on which route you are taking, though I can't think of anything off the top of my head. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe 65 on the way down, then back up 75 on the way home .. at least to Knoxville .. but it's very open at the moment.  Prolly spend at least one day in Nashville, I usually do anyway. — Ched :  ?  00:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting route...down through Nashville and Franklin, up through Chattanooga and Knoxville. Sounds like a good trip. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 01:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Eh .. hopefully the weather will be nice, I always like to get good shots of sunsets, scenery, interesting buildings and all. My niece is graduating from college - so it's a good road trip.  Not sure how much time I'll have to just lollygag yet though - business is starting to pick up quite a bit. But I'm going to try to think inside the "wikipedia" box while I'm clicking away, so maybe I might get something worthwhile.  I just started uploading some pics to commons .. only a couple there so far - but I have plenty to add to that collection.  Haven't really figured out how this license change affects anything - seems to be more a convenience to things outside wiki in regards to the share alike stuff.


 * I'm looking at your talk page too ... it's gonna take you a week to get this all sorted out and archived .. lol.


 * Looks like Allegheny county is going to be absorbed by Pittsburgh, and the 911 center still wants to work with my emergency response database, but until they can come up with some sort of compensation - I haven't been particularly pro-active on it. I don't mind volunteer work, but at some point .. you just have to say "enough".


 * Not prying, but I do hope things are getting better for you on the real life end of things. Sooo glad you have a few moments to drop a personal note too - I appreciate that!!!  I look forward to working with you on the Boyle article (once it calms down a bit .. lol).  How's things going with the 33 article? ... don't think I helped very much, even though I did try. — Ched :  ?  01:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'd like to get more into photography, but the camera I have is a piece of junk, relatively speaking. Good luck with that. Internally, I can't see how the license change will have any real affect on operations...it'll just make things easier to deal with off-wiki. Creative Commons really is superior to GFDL for our purposes.
 * Wow, that's interesting re: Allegheny County. Yeah, economy is tight right now, but the gov't has more money than the individual citizens...if they aren't going to compensate you, they don't deserve the work. Volunteer work should be rewarding to the individual in some way...whether its building a house for Habitat for Humanities, cleaning up roadsides, or playing on Wikipedia. Slaving away on code and databases just doesn't seem....fun. lol. I had actually forgotten that you were in that area of PA...my cousin is across the state attending Villanova right now, actually.
 * To be honest, aside from trying to work out the debate on the talk page, I had nothing to do with "33". I had to step away as it was such an insipid argument. I might check back in, but I'm afraid my brain will decompose further...like I said, editing here should be fun, since this is my pasttime, not my job. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 01:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Villanova? ... cool. I enjoy photography, thought about going into it professionally when I was graduating high school even.  In fact, a 35mm SLR was my graduation present.  But, I fell in love, took a meaningless job, got married, and didn't even get back to college until I was XX years old.  I have a decent camera now, but it could be better - so I just enjoy what I can, when I can.  Looking at some of the things you keep an eye on, I can see why you'd get frustrated.  I try to get involved in more and more the longer I'm here, but I've found that there's a limit too - and I'll just disappear from conversations when they get beyond the "fun" stage.  I go through stages of jumping into various sections of Wikipedia, policy, AfD, RfA, "Not", etc. to learn .. and I'm so glad that I have NASCAR and Royalbroil to fall back on once I've had my fill of "learning".  At the NASCAR stuff, everyone works together, helps each other, and supports each other - kind of like NASCAR in real life. I even went out and "bought" some reference books for the subject, which reminds me that I really need to get back to editing actual articles there too.  I enjoy the debates over various things, but when they degrade into childish "but, but, but" arguments, I tend to think ... "Whatever .. talk to the hand, cause the person is leaving".  You're 100% right .. it has to be enjoyable, we're not getting paid for this.  And thanks to your kind guidance when I first started, I do enjoy it here. ;) — Ched :  ?  02:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * To be blunt, you've done more in your few months here than I have in several years. You are a natural. It seems everywhere I look I see you offering your thoughs, whether on article talk pages, WP:ANI, etc, etc. You'll be an admin in no time, I predict, if you have any inclination towards that. You've moved well past any guidance I may have once given, straight to offering your own sage advise on a variety of fronts. Wiki benefits from your presence :) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 03:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC) (Yes, I've probably said that before, but I am awfully proud of your work here. 03:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC))


 * I'm at a complete loss for words here (and that don't happen too often). — Ched : ?  03:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Muahaha, I rendered someone speechless today! — Huntster (t • @ • c) 03:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * lol ........................................ I got nothing here ;) — Ched : ?  03:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * wow - yep, I really got caught off guard with that one. Considering the source, I consider that high praise indeed.  While it's still a bit early to really consider the impact such a change could have on my editing and wikipedia, I'd imagine it's just a natural progression for editors who've accumulated enough experience to used block, protect, and delete functions responsibly.  I'll definitely keep the thought in mind as I continue to absorb the vast vault of knowledge that's available here.  As far as being beyond your guidance, naaaa... I'm not so presumptuous that I'd ever believe that.  It's obvious to me that you have a rather large repository of knowledge and experience still available to anyone willing to listen.  Actually, there are probably very few editors that I wouldn't be able to learn something from.  Over the years, I've been a network administrator, forum moderator,  message board admin, chat room sysop, and held various management positions; so, an extra layer of responsibility isn't something I'd be afraid of, or shy away from.  When the time comes, I'd be quite happy to have you bring the things I'd need to know to the table, and we can figure out where to go from there.  I consider myself very fortunate that my early days of confusion and frustration that most new editors face, was met by your kindness, consideration, and experience.  I may well have become discouraged if it were not for you taking the extra time to guide and encourage me in the proper constructive directions.  Hey, I've only given out 3 barnstars I think - and you got the first, if I'm not mistaken.  I believe that it's redeemable at your local Starbucks with the mere addition of $5 to claim a cup of coffee. ;).  Well, I'd best be getting back to editing some of the NASCAR articles, before RB thinks I got lost and sends out a search party .. lol.  I do want to get back to you about some of the FUR stuff too, I read through some of your work on that, and see I need to do a bit of learning on that end of things.  On a closing note, it was really really good to see you in such an upbeat mood, and able to spend a bit of time without being rushed last night.  I hope it's a sign of improvements in life for ya!  Cheers buddy. ;) — Ched :  ?  16:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "Over the years, I've been a..." See? That's why I say what I say. You have significantly more experience than I could hope to attain. Welcome things here :) (I remember I was once an IRC sysop and a forum mod, but I couldn't begin to remember where!) And don't worry about the search party...I've got some steaks on hand to throw off the tracking dogs! But anything you need to know regarding copyright and fair-use, ask away. I'm not an expert, but I feel I have a pretty good understanding of things. Cheers, and *vrroooom!* (I keep missing my motorsports events!) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL at the I don't remember where ... now you see what I have to deal with in my own distorted mind every day ... lol .. I got a little work done on the main NASCAR page, hopefully that will keep RB from cracking the whip too hard .. lol. heading over to your page for the questions. — Ched :  ?  23:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Pictures
Ahh ... Deep breath here. OK .. now, the legal aspects of photographs. As I understand it, if a person is a public figure, and I take a picture of him/her - then I am free to post that picture anywhere I want. So, If I took a picture of Dale Earnhardt while he was in a public forum, it's perfectly fine to post that picture here? .. am I right so far? ... Now, I take a picture that has people that are NOT public figures, but the picture was taken while they were out in public. Do I need to have a release form signed by them in order to post the picture? I have pictures from back in the 70's of race car stuff. I don't want to just upload the pics and run the risk of someone saying they didn't allow their picture to be posted in public. I'll stop there for the moment, and go with more questions once I understand what you reply with ... good to see you back by the way! ;) — Ched : ?  23:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ugh, I can't deal with the Susan Boyle article right now...too much junk. Okay, pictures. So long as the image is taken in a public location (aka, in the public domain), then it is fine to take pictures of individuals, especially if those persons are already public figures, like Earnhardt. Even individuals that are not public figures are okay, again, so long as the setting is a public location. Private locations (homes, restaurants, some stores, etc) should be avoided. There is a template, however, that you can append on photo pages that indicates to readers that personality rights may need to be respected...I cannot remember the template off-hand, but searching around Commons should find it. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * What? .. is someone else trying to edit the Susan Boyle article? ... lmao. OK ... so restaurants and stores aren't considered public places then?  Not that there's anything major in anything I'm looking at to upload - just trying to sort out the details here.  I have a picture that I took, and then photoshoped ... a private person sitting on a bench during a parade.  Can I upload that picture without having a signed release form from him? — Ched :  ?  00:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, they are public places, but there is a moral issue involved as well. Usually people in those places expect some degree of privacy, whereas on the street or at a major public event, privacy cannot be assumed. I would say that a public bench during a parade would be considered public domain. Is the focus that person, or the parade itself? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 03:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Very good point, and no, I'd never post a picture of anyone if they didn't want me to - regardless of the legal issues. The picture I was thinking about, was an older gentleman - sitting on a bench outside a local bar as the parade passed by, and he is the focus of the picture.  White hair and beard, bright red baseball hat - the contrast in colors made a wonderful picture.  Not something that could be used at Wikipedia for anything that I can think of, it just sparked my curiosity.  Probably best to see if I could find the gentleman, and simply ask him I suppose.  As far as the parade goes, or a sporting event - I'm getting the impression that it's ok to post pictures, even if some people are identifiable, because it is a public event though.  When I get a few of them uploaded to commons, I'll have you take a look, just to make sure. ;)


 * I noticed this morning that the Susan Boyle article has been protected - wow .. what a runaway train that has become huh? I do agree with the external links issues you've brought up too.  Is that why it was protected?  I didn't really look much beyond the talk page, perhaps I'll have a gander at the page history - I wouldn't be surprised if there was some edit warring or vandalism going on - given the high profile attention it's getting.  It's got to be frustrating to you and a lot of other editors who are trying to improve the article, no doubt.  I tried a couple times to edit too .. but just kept running into too many edit conflicts.  I'm thinking that maybe the page protection was actually a good idea in this case, at least for a short time.  Certainly not your typical article! Cheers ;) — Ched :  ?  13:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Since the gentleman is in a public location, even that picture should be okay. Just remember that we shouldn't uploaded images that likely won't have an encyclopaedic usage, so think of that when deciding what to upload. And yes, I'm fed up with the article and the editors involved. I'll go back, perhaps, when things settle down, but I'll not have random editors demean me because the disagree with my edits. There's a lot of ill-will and less-than-precise grasp of the English language going on in that article. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought so, but was just checking with you cause you have more experience in that area (pics and copyvio). Not that I'd have a reason to upload that gentleman to Wikipedia, I was wondering more in line with my own pics (google pics).  I try to conduct my real life affairs with the same integrity that is (or at least should be) expected here.  I know that I haven't posted any pics of my sister, simply because she prefers I don't. -- On the Boyle article, I've given up trying to add anything as well; even though a few of my first edits and references have stood the test of time, I'd rather work with a couple folks in unison to improve on something, than fight a swarming mob interested only in having their own sig or IP listed at the top of the history page.  I'll add a comment here or there on the talk page if I think it will have any bearing on anything; but, even on the talk page (as you mentioned) there are some totally clueless, inept, and downright rude comments that have been made - simply to gain some (inherited) claim to fame I suspect.  I'd venture a guess that some of the most vocal, and visible editors have no idea of the true impression that some of their posts gives to the average editor.  But that's just my thought at the moment, subject to change at any time ... lol.  To be honest, Boyle won't be able to duplicate that kind of sensationalism again, although she may well go on to a successful singing career. I think she has a beautiful voice, and a delightful personality, so I do hope (and believe) that she'll do fine.  In a few weeks though ... pfft ... some other article will be the "I need to edit this" hot potato.  Chris Benoit, Virgin Killer, Larry Sanger, Jimbo, a flash in the pan hot streak in the NHL playoffs, a rising MLB star - something will grab peoples attention away from the article before long.


 * Back to the pics, I've been photoshoping some of my photography, (size, tweak etc.), and should have a few more to upload by the end of next week. Races, sunsets maybe .. still going through it all.


 * Don't ever let inexperienced, inept, or rude editors get you down Huntster. If you're ever in doubt, just look at your contribs, a legacy to be envied without a doubt.  You do damn fine work, I know it, and if you're honest with yourself, you know it too.  When you can look in the mirror, and the person looking back doesn't express any doubts ... you're where you should be my friend. (excluding any personal religious beliefs one might have.)  Stay strong, stay right ... remember, you're the guiding influence for at least one lone editor on the web. ;) — Ched :  ?  00:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

you once told me not to be afraid to be bold
... so Wikipedia talk:Deceased Wikipedians/Proposal to establish practices to be followed for deceased Wikipedians — Ched : ?  16:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Which reminds me, do you watch your email, the one your sig links to? And would it be acceptable to send you my personal info as my trusted contact?  — Ched :  ?  02:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, looks like a great proposal! I'm not sure how I feel about that issue though. In any case, yes, I check my email regularly (so long as my computer is deciding to work) so you may send me whatever you would like :) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 02:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * cool. I'll send you my info in the next day or two. Not that anyone will ever figure out my network - but at least with phone numbers and such, you could contact folks.  Yea, it was tough to try to write all that up, but I thought it was important to.  That's not the time for admins to be having a debate over things - better to have something to go on.  Actually I'm really surprised at how many folks have commented, I figured a bunch of young people that don't want to consider that - maybe 10 - 15 comments. — Ched :  ?


 * I've always been surprised by the age spread of Wikipedians. While a younger crowd does dominate, they tend to stick to touching up articles. It is the more mature, educated and experienced crowd that tends to make high-level contributions to the site. This is one of those websites that forces one to realise that you can't make generalisations regarding groups...you have young folk, just kids really, who are outstanding editors and individuals, and you have older people who would love to see this place burn to the ground. Takes all kinds. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 02:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL .. yep, I'm learning that more every day. Funny, something you told me when I first started seems to show up daily.  I don't remember the exact quote, but something about how the newness has never left you, even after all the years you had been here.  More and more I'm understanding what you meant by that. ;) — Ched :  ?  03:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed when looking at your talk page that probably 75% of the posts are from me. I know you have better things to do than babysit, so I'll try to be a little more judicial in my posts. ;)  (that probably means I'll just save up a bunch of little ones, and make one great big one ... lol) — Ched :  ?  22:25, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * lol, no problem at all. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 00:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * BTW, email received, will take good care of it. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 08:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I know it's in good hands ;). BTW back (lol) ... I added a section to the Boyle article, I'd be interested in your feedback on it.  The Critical peer analysis section. — Ched :  ?  19:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Boyle Talk Archives
hey Huntster, I noticed you set up a bot to take care of the Boyle talk archives (thanks by the way). I started the Archive index page, when you get a chance, would you check to see that I did it right - I'm not too savy with the bots around here yet, so I don't want to mess anything up. Thanks ;) — Ched : ?  14:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

= 2009, May =

Release dates of singles
(from Stan's page) Stan, let me reiterate what has been said before...please use edit summaries to describe what it is you've done, and why you've done it if it is unsourced. Your mass-changing of release dates is not acceptable, and considering the considering the comments here, your lack of a response isn't either. I would ask that you provide some indication that you understand what is being said about this situation. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 04:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Huntster, the reason I'm changing release dates for music singles is because I have developed a method of finding out when a song debuted in the top 10 or 40 of the Billboard Hot 100 and then subtracting it by 18 days. I suggest creating links that show when a single was released to avoid further confusion and altering involving me. Thanks. StanMarsh19 (talk) 04:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Stan, thanks for replying. While I appreciate the time you've put into this work, simply subtracting 18 days from the chart dates is highly inaccurate, and strictly not permitted on Wikipedia. This is called Original Research. The only dates that are acceptable are the actual, verifiable release dates, preferably accompanied by a reliable source. If you have any questions, please let me know. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying back, but will you accept my request so I won't do this again? It also might be helpful for other people. If there is a reason why you are declining my offer, please let me know. StanMarsh19 (talk) 21:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to with "creating links that show when a single was released". Can you clarify this for me? — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm talking about looking for when a music single is released in the United States or anywhere around the world, and if you find them, you make a link leading to the website that shows when the single was released. I don't know how to make one, and I'm not sure if know, too. If you don't, I may consider having some other Wikipedia nerd figure out all the mumble-jumble that I created and fix it. If I do this again, feel free to suspend me from the website. StanMarsh19 (talk) 21:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I think you are looking for Citing sources, which explains how to provide a citation. In short, you simply provide something like this: . That Citing Sources link should provide all the info you need. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's EXACTLY what I was trying to explain to you. StanMarsh19 (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

more of those damn "Ched" posts
Hey Huntster - hope life is treating you better than the economy is treating everyone else. ;). Had a great trip down through TN, KY, VA, Alabama etc., but didn't get as much in the line of pics as I had hoped.  Was good to get away from WP for a bit I think - and I see that not much has changed in a week ... lol.  I try to remember my "roots" in WP, and did want to drop in and say hi to you, and wish you well before I get too involved again in "editing" again.  Also had a quick favor to ask.  I know your time here is limited, but if you could look in on the SoxBot V from time to time, it may be worth keeping an eye on.  I see that X! is taking a wiki-break, and there was a glitch in the admin-highlighter do-dad this morning. User:Ais523/adminrights.js >> User:Ais523/adminrights-admins.js >> User:SoxBot V/adminrights-admins.js.  SoxBot V basically blanked the admin list briefly, then restored it a short time later.  I'm not savy enough to know if that's a housekeeping chore or not. I did notice that it's been done before though. Anyway, hope all is well on your end, all my best - Ched: — Ched : ?  13:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, glad you had a good trip. Regarding SoxBot, yes, I have that adminwatch page watchlisted. I caught one of those blankings before, but I'm just now getting online today. Strange little bug, but nothing mission critical. I know several other admins watchlist it as well. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks buddy! That little guy seemed to have a mind of his own yesterday.  Maybe the bots are becoming "self-aware", lol. — Ched :  ?  13:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

NFL Draft
I am currently creating a new infobox for the NFL Draft and I am asking you for some suggestions, ideas, add ons, and etc. on how to make it better. please contact be back ASAP if you have anything, Thank You --Mr. Unknown (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2009 (UTC).

Infobox: Template:Infobox NFL Draft.

Not Posting
Given a long list of recent events: Sometimes I find the hardest thing to do here is to not post a comment. Reminder to myself: The project is supposed to be about writing "articles". Interesting concept, this Wikipedia. — Ched : ?  11:14, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I occasionally find myself in that situation. However, I mostly just avoid going to those project and talk pages. If I've somehow missed a procedure or whatever else amongst the vast litany of rules and regs here, they can fire me. Avoiding contentious stuff helps me keep my sanity. :) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 18:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * LMFAO. reply: Sanity? .. Mwaahaaahaaa ... what sanity? I can't tell the inmates from the gatekeepers ... lol.  That's what I like about working with the NASCAR folks ... we all know that we're all nuts, but we have fun doing it!  I'll never know how much you read out there in "Drama-Land", but I know you don't get involved.  A trait that I truly admire Huntster.  No wonder you're so well thought of around here.  I give you full leave to yank me back into line any time, and every time, I ever stray from what I should be doing here.  In fact, perhaps I've just realized that a subtle hint should be enough.  Thank you, and I'm greatful for your "sanity", it truly helps me keep mine. ;) — Ched :  ?  18:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, that wasn't intended as a hint, subtle or not. I've seen plenty of discussions you've gotten involved in, and they are nicely thought out, neutral and considerate. Never hesitate to lend a voice when and where it is needed. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 18:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I'm a bit flabbergasted now ... lol. Well, the key thing really should be for me to become the best editor I can, concentrate on adding quality content to the encyclopedia.  I do enjoy collaborating with the other folks here, and sometimes I think I might get a little carried away in gabbing.   Well, 1953 in NASCAR I think will be my next effort, maybe another DYK, who knows, I might make it to being a decent editor down the road. ;) — Ched :  ?  18:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

hey
its ayers rock, not uluru. We are english speaking, not abbo speaking. --Campcoreec (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That's your personal opinion. The Australian government decreed that it's official name, under the dual-naming policy, was "Uluru/Ayers Rock", and through consensus amongst editors, we here at Wikipedia use the term Uluru, with Ayers Rock being mentioned throughout the article. Not to mention, Uluru is officially Aboriginal property, and thus uses the Aboriginal name, so your "we speak English" argument really isn't appropriate. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 18:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ayers rock is not abbo property. It belongs to the Australian Government. It is abbo property ceremonially, but not offically. --Campcoreec (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Cite video
Since you've regularly commented on the talk page of cite video in the past, you might be interested in my proposal to convert the template to use citation/core (which cite web, cite news, cite journal, and cite book use). See Template talk:Cite video; feedback would be appreciated. Thanks! —TKD  [talk]  [c] 16:35, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Evanescence order and formats
Should this be undone, too? Wasn't alphabetical order chosen for some reason? Also, I undid the date format change. It's a moderately common style in references to distinguish publication dates in a "regular" format and the access dates in an ISO-style format. Whatever the current wording of MOSNUM, my understanding was that this style wouldn't be disallowed. Gimmetrow 23:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I've rolled the page back to the last good version. Changing the band member order is a kind of perennial thing for FallenWings, if I recall. And yes, alphabetical order has been used forever simply because it is the absolute least arbitrary format (though Lee is always kept in front as the "leader", but I wouldn't care if that changed). — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

All seeing
don't miss much do ya? I was really really confused for a couple hours there. click-read-click-read was starting to give me a headache on all the little pods, podas, 'Zillas, etc. Was even gonna say hi to one of the little pods, but ... "Ched not want to step in little do-do by mistake"; not want 'Zilla to squishy little Ched ... lol. I don't know if you remember, or even saw, this some time ago - but the whole thing has enjoyed my viewing pleasure, which is why I noticed your post. I thought "WOW, Huntster posting to one of the Dramaz boards?" .. this ought to be good ... lol. To be honest, that post of Daed's to my talk page had me pretty hot, it was only the WP:CIV that kept my true thoughts restrained. On a side note: Hey, User:Ched (public) found that little template/tag for alt. accounts, do I get brownie points for that? ... lol. Is there anything going on around this joint that you're not aware of Huntster? You always seem to manage to show up at the right place, at the right time - hasn't ceased to amaze me yet. ;) — Ched : ?  22:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

same
Hey Huntster Happy Memorial Day to you too buddy! — Ched : ?  01:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * pfft .. what the hell do I know... lol. I doubt that you realize how much I value your help and oversight buddy.  I simply can't put into words what I feel in my heart and soul.  I think it's best if I stop right there, I ain't much for the mushy crap.  Just "Thank You". — Ched :  ?  08:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Hey Huntster, .. I need your attention here. Tell me what you think buddy. — Ched : ?  09:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * diff}, and my reply — Ched : ?  09:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

BS
hey, all the bullshit aside Huntster ... you've been keeping an eye on me, protecting me, watching out for me and all. I know that. Do you honestly think that an RfA is what I should be doing right now? I was on my way out of here until you approached me and and encouraged me to stay here. I think you know that I trust your judgment implicitly here. Bottom line? ... You gonna type up a co-nom because you think it's the best thing for WP? I don't really care if I have a couple extra buttons, what I do care about is the trust of those that are the guardians of the wiki. Your opinion is more important than you think buddy. — Ched : ?  11:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Okie doekie. I dropped a reply at Pedro's, and dropped User:Ched Davis/RFA-learn into existence.  As always, any suggestions or thoughts you can muster up are always welcomed.  I'll admit, you mentioned this possibility a while back buddy, although I'm not sure I was expecting it quite so soon.  I will make this humble promise Huntster, I will always do my very best ... with or without the buttons ... to make every effort to aim my work here in the direction of improving the 'pedia.  At times I feel that I've been a burden on you my friend, always leaning on you for guidance, I'm grateful that you've always been so responsive and helpful, even though I know that real life is the primary focus for us all. ;) — Ched :  ?  20:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

File:NCIS Los Angeles.jpg
Doesn't the fact that it still is a logo/promotional image prevent it from being included on WikiCommons? It's doesn't appear that the original uploader made it, because it's taken off the official CBS website which is linked in the summay section. El Greco(talk) 19:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I'm aware, no, the fact that it fails the threshold of originality is good enough. That doesn't mean it isn't still trademarked, it just cannot maintain a copyright. See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Logos_of_TV_programs for more examples (though I think one of them may not qualify, the Logo YEMEC one). — Huntster (t • @ • c) 19:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay then, I did not know that. El Greco(talk) 20:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

re: Webcite and backup of refs.
Great Huntster! I appreciate that!! I don't have that button, and would have to do manually. I think it's probably something that will become a lot more prominent in the future though, backing up refs. I'm looking over at the Trackmania site now, I just can't believe how far the graphics for this kind of stuff has come in such a short time. ;). — Ched :  ?  02:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I had seen that WebciteBot come in and do its thing on an article I was working on a while back. And I even mentioned the whole idea that webcitation.org could help with his 24 articles.  He had been manually saving links, and printing out the hardcopy for the articles.  I should really put some time into that project for him, but so many of the sources for 24 revolve around blog type material.  I know some of it is acceptable if it's a major news outlet with publishing oversight, but I'm just cautious about referencing those things on the edge.  I think I asked a question at BAG one time, but it's not an area I'll be active in for quite a while.  I love the bots when they work right, and I know a couple of the guys to ask if I want to do something .. so I'll probably just cheat and say "Hey Mr.-Z, MZM, etc. .. can ya do me a favor"? ... lol).  I haven't done any programming in soooo long.  Maybe one day when I need a change of pace. ;) — Ched :  ?  02:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Jane Skinner
Restored the content. Perhaps my argument swayed you some. ;-) You referenced previous debate/consensus I gather from lots of experience on multiple pages. I left some discussion on the talk page. Thanks. -Pecoc (talk) 01:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

= 2009, June =

Looking for pie
/me storms into the room
 * Huntster? .. HUNNNNSTER! Where the hell is my damn pie? ;) — Ched :  ?  12:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

AGF Cabal
interested? — Ched : ?  08:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

WebCite
Hey Hunster..remember how you archived all of these, how would I retrieve the archived pages in future, say, if the links were to go down? Steve Crossin Talk/Help us mediate! 22:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey Steve, retrieving from WebCite is really simple. Let me toss a few bits of code your way:
 * To check if a URL is in WebCite:
 * To archive a website:
 * If you know how to create buttons in the Bookmarks toolbar, in either Firefox or IE, then just create a button for each of the snippits above. When you go to a website, you can use the first snippit to check if there is already an archive, and you can use the second snippit to automatically archive that page. You can also go to the WebCitation website and plug in a URL to check if it is in the archive, but the above method is definitely faster. If you need any help getting the buttons up and running, just let me know. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, uh..I don't know how to create a button in Firefox. I know how to bookmark something...but not sure how to create a button with the code you gave me. Steve Crossin Talk/Help us mediate! 22:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, assuming you have the toolbar running (if not, click "View", "Toolbars" and "Bookmarks Toolbar"), right click in an empty space and click New Bookmark. Give it a name such as "WebCite check", then in the location field paste the first snippit above. Repeat the process for the second snippit, using a name like "WebCite archive" or just "Archive", and make sure to replace the "ADD EMAIL ADDRESS HERE" bit with an actual email address, so you can store links to the different sites you've archived. I've set up my Yahoo email account to automatically route such emails to a separate folder so everything stays tidy and out of the way. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The first one works fine, but I'm getting an "Internal Error" with the second one..no big deal :) Thanks much. Steve Crossin Talk/Help us mediate! 22:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, the archive function of the site has apparently been down for a little while. They may be doing maintenance, or there may be problems. Just keep checking back ever so often. The snippit will work, the problem is just on their end. :) — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Fallen
Could you comment on User_talk:Tassedethe? Gimmetrow 15:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * When I first saw that rename, I got a tad annoyed, but then realised it was the most unbiased way for handling the situation. At this time, I don't view it as inappropriate. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:03, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * OK. The reasoning bothers me as a precedent, though. Gimmetrow 01:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

metadata
I am curious as to the metadata you are mining after seeing your edit at Susan Boyle. It seems to be principally related to citations... What you are doing seems quite fastidious, and not really capable of being easily automated. Are you doing it manually? Ohconfucius (talk) 10:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, everything in my first edit is manually performed. Basically, my primary concern was converting author to first and last (where appropriate), since this generates more easily handled metadata, and even more importantly, presents the data is a uniform "last, first" format, which is the typical form we see here and elsewhere. Secondary is the proper use of the work and publisher fields..."work" describes the publication, "publisher" describes the company itself. Very important difference when it comes to citations. I just like uniformity, which also encapsulates my wrapping all "ref name" fields in quotation marks, which also ensures everything works properly regardless of what is included in that field. I don't personally mine metadata, but it is done, so I like to ensure everything works right for those end users. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation. I will try to be more precise in using those templates. I always use refnames without spaces, so I never need the quote marks, I see you also use such strings, but have your own system for the names. Someone already told me about the differences between work (for The Times) and publisher (for News International Ltd). I admit to being confused when there are parameters for first last author coauthor, and exactly when these should be used. You also reorder the parameters - Is this important? Ohconfucius (talk) 10:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Re: order, naa, not important, I just have a logical approach to the layout...url first; title second; publication third; authors, pages, other errata fourth; and various dates fifth. Doesn't really matter, but it *feels* right to me...kind of an order of importance, if you will. I admit, I rarely include the publisher field, as I find it fairly unnecessary to the citation, especially if a wikilink can be provided for the work or publication. Regarding author fields, if there is a first and last name available, I would always use first and last (note that middle names, of course, belong in the "first" field). Author can be used if there is only one name, or other generic term (in the Boyle article, for example, "Staff" and a poster's username). More appropriate to use "author" in this case than "last". coauthor is used when more than one author is given for a source, and should be formatted in the "last, first; last, first" style. Note the colon separating the names. As for the refnames, yeah, my style is an abbreviation of the publication plus an abbreviated ISO format, with a "-2", "-3", etc, if disambiguation is needed. Any time you need help or clarification for citations, just let me know. That is definitely my speciality on Wiki. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

re: ANI post
re: this. I avoid the religious and political areas - and avoid them diligently ... lol. But, seems to be WP:SPA pushing a definite POV, already had the warnings ... can't see why anyone would question an indef. But you've been around a lot longer than I have, I might be missing something. ;) — Ched : ?  10:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, you know that I trust your judgment on almost anything and everything here. I'd be totally shocked if anyone questioned a block you issued.  I know that all things religious are touchy subjects, so I certainly understand wanting some feedback.  Prolly someone else will just jump in and do it without discussion ... lol.


 * On a side note: are the items you clean up in the reference data considered "meta-data"? I recently added a script to my monobook that shows me Persondata, but haven't really started using it yet.  Do the two relate in anyway? Questions, Questions, Questions .. Oh, my friend, I got a million of em for you some day ... LOL! — Ched :  ?  10:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

← <* cough *> — Ched : ?  13:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC) (am I learning my Wikipedia or what ;D )

when I'm done?
When I'm done with the questions, should I wait for you to say anything? I still consider you my sponsor and mentor here (as well as a good friend), so it's Dependant upon your "want" to do any co thing. Should I wait for Pedro to transclude, or should I do that myself? Once again my friend, I'm asking for a wink or a nod in the direction that is best. ;) — Ched : ?  02:05, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

User:121.158.252.188
I think you should issue a warning to this user, considering the numerous vandalizing edits this person has done to various Celtic Woman articles. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

wow
completely different story being on the inside of an RfA. Interesting concept that we have here, kinda makes me wish for the old days .. LOL — Ched :  ?  03:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing Lipscomb coordinates
Can you tell me how you found them so I can learn for next time? I used Placenames, and confirmed that Lipscomb School was in the right county - I've seen them mix up school and university before (or perhaps I've made other errors) - I'm surprised that an elementary school would be on their list but not the university. Do you have a more reliable source?-- SPhilbrick  T  11:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, Google Maps works well for such high-profile locations. You can just type in the name of the university into the search bar, and it'll generally get you to the right place, or at least the general area. Another strategy is to visit the entity's website and see if you can find a directions or contact page with a physical address, and then again plug them into Google Maps. An even better alternative is Acme Mapper, which provides the coordinates right on the page. Up to you which one you use. Lemme know if you need any help. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 11:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick response. I knew that one could get coordinates from Google, I tried once and didn't see it. I tried again, and I now see that if I click on the "link" button, it creates some code that contains the coordinates. Thanks also for the link to Acme Mapper, I've book marked it.-- SPhilbrick  T  13:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

MediaWiki edits
I am contacting you because you are one of three administrators who have edited the MediaWiki space in the past 24 hours. I've realized that the "Cancel" link is no longer functioning, and I believe that your edits here may have been a factor. I will be contacting the other two administrators as well to see if it was their edit and not yours.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 13:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

GateWorld
Can you vote on the following discussion. I'm asking you because of your comment on the wikiproject page. --TIAYN (talk) 23:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Huntster ...
I wouldn't know where to begin. From your encouragement and support in the earliest of days, to endless questions you've helped me with, to the support, faith, and trust you've always granted me ... I am grateful. If you are the Lone Ranger, you're welcome to consider me your loyal and trustworthy sidekick Tonto ... OK ... well ... maybe just the horse Trigger ... lol. Thank you Huntser, for all - of course you realize, this is only going to breed a whole new category.. of questions don't you? ... lol.


 * Question number 1: This is a good thing? ... right? ;) — Ched :  ?  02:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC) (Ched heads for the store to buy up some of those speedy tags .. lol (j/k))

OK .. you said I could ... lol. There was a huge change in licensing as we went from GFDL to the CC-BY-SA thing. The most I've been able to see is that we're now required to attach acknowledgment to the original author to both "copy" and any "modifications". I need to get up to speed on this, what should I be reading? — Ched : ?  04:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

D' oh
you ought to love this one. X-). — Ched :  ?  03:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * but I fixed it. ;) (see previous revs.)   Hey, I wonder - If I would have struck enough of the support !votes, would a bot have removed my bit? lol — Ched :  ?  03:45, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Kensi Lo or Blye?
I made the change from Kensi Lo to Kensi Blye because:


 * the official CBS website lists her name as Kensi Blye
 * IMDB lists the name as Blye
 * several other sources (do a Google search) list it as Blye
 * the preview trailer for NCIS: LA from their website and YouTube states it as Blye
 * other official CBS videos state the surname as Blye

Perhaps we should leave the name as Kensi Blye until we find out officially whether it is otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewconnell (talk • contribs) 18:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Help!!!! Problem in CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
is putting a bunch of crufty info on new character Kaye Sullivan into that page, and their other edits are often questionable. Can you help on this? I am hesitant to blank the page for fear of being flagged for it - but there is absolutely no citations available about this character other than she will be on CSI according to CSI Files - no word on who might play her. Thank you. Trista (user: Triste Tierra - not allowed to log in at work) 24.176.191.234 (talk) 21:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Reverted and redirected the article, and warned the user. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed this was also the user who was listing Bob Dole as an NCIS and NCIS: LA cast member and had listed Kim Delaney as a new CSI Vegas cast member - so I went ahead and reported them. There have been several problems similar to this one with the CSI/NCIS pages, and I am personally tired of it. I want them and Wikipedia in general to be good sources, not a playground for idiots. I am one of those people who would GLADLY give up being able to edit on my IP address (unable to log in at work), if IP's and new users (redlinks?) were blocked from major edits. I also think a month of semi-protection on all the CSI/NCIS pages might be enough to get rid of many of the vandals, but I also realise they would just find something else to screw around with. Thank you very much Huntster. Cheers! Trista 24.176.191.234 (talk) 22:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good deal on reporting the problem. Since I have no familiarity with the situation, that's definitely the best option. Thankfully, flagged revisions will be enabled soon, so hopefully that will keep out the majority of junk edits (at least from the live versions of the pages. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 22:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * is almost definately the same person. I used WHOIS and found it's the same ISP, and today they were putting uncited cast member Marianne Jean-Baptiste in the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation cast list. You already reverted the other 5 made-up names for NCIS: Los Angeles. Just letting you know. TristaBella (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Wicca page and other stuff
Greetings Huntster! I do not only root around in the CSI/NCIS pages. I notice there is much borderline vandalism going on in the Wicca page also. I know this is difficult to control, as there are so many opinions on it. I myself am not willing to add to the page, even with solid resources, as I am still too easily p.o.'ed when people take apart my edits...but that's my own problem to deal with. Anyway, may I politely suggest a semi-protect of the page against editing by anon. IP's and new users? I do believe I've told you I would willingly give up my IP editing priveleges if Wikipedia made everyone register with a verifiable e-mail address. I want free speech as much as anyone else, but also want Wikipedia to be a reliable resource, and not just a playground for bored twits. Okay, off my soapbox now. The semi-protect of Wicca is just something for you to think about.

By the way, can you tell me exactly where I can find the section in TV Projects that says former cast members are always left in the main info box listing? All I can get from a particular admin (who only does this to one show) is "this is the way we deal with" former cast members. I want to be a good editor, but it's difficult when a request for the rules is ignored (the request was in several places - there's no way it wasn't seen). I also wonder if some shows, such as Law & Order, would not have hugely unwieldy info boxes if all former actors were listed. Thanks again for all your help. I'm not stalking you, but trying to watch your edits so I can learn how such things are done properly. And thank you for not biting me for doing things wrong. Polite responses go so much further than a "do as I say, not as I do" or "not done right, so it's being ignored". Cheers, TristaBella (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * By the way, sending you a big, fat Zen hug! TristaBella (talk) 20:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)