User talk:Kaldari/Archive 16

Manual of Style for diagrams and maps?
Hello! I have recently discovered your [ancient] proposal to develop a set of guidelines for creating maps and diagrams on Wikipedia. I also read that another editor proposed that the idea might be better for Wikimedia Commons. I went there and checked, and didn't see anything. I think that a set of guidelines is a very, very good idea and would like to revive the discussion if no such guidelines were ever actually implemented. What say you? Where did this proposal end up? How can I help make it happen? Is it too late?? KDS 4444 Talk  06:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It doesn't appear I ever heard back from you regarding this proposal. I am just writing to make sure you got my message (above) and to reiterate my own interest in the idea.  Please let me know if you have any thoughts.  Thanks!  KDS 4444  Talk  21:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, towards this end, I have created this document: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KDS4444/Creating_SVG_files_using_Adobe_Illustrator_CS6_%28and_Inkscape_0.48%29 KDS 4444  Talk  08:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Did it change?
Yo, Kaldari, has the behavior of $wgUserNewMsgRevisionId changed? I thought it got set to the first unread talk page revid, but now it seems to be the id of the very last edit made to the talk page, missing any prior unread edits. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 04:00, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No, the behavior of wgUserNewMsgRevisionId should be the same as always. I just tested it myself and got the id of the first unread talk message, rather than the last edit. Could you try it again? Kaldari (talk) 05:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Possible Echo bug
Hey Haldari, I've noticed you seem to be one of the point guys for echo and messaging and am wondering if the JavaScript "alert" style box saying I have new messages was part of that or if it is something else. I love the box, well almost. I wish there was a way to dismiss it so I didn't have to move it to the bottom corner of my screen first of all. It would be great if it had three buttons. "View Message", "Dismiss", and "Ignore" so that I could either click on it and see the message, dismiss it for a little while (it would come back after a certain number of pages loaded or preset time), or just ignore it and it never comes back unless there is another new message. Also, as a sidenote, when the popup loads, it seems to force WP:AWB to stop. Don't know if that is an intended behavior or what but it is really annoying sometimes when I just want to process a thousand pages and not be disturbed for a couple hours. Finally, and this one is another feature request for it, could it offer a little more information such as who posted the message, which section, and possibly even have the "read message" take you directly to that section? Thanks! Technical 13 (talk) 13:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just got back from a brief vacation. I'll try to look into this tomorrow. In the meantime, you might want to try turning off the alert from your notification preferences, and turning on the gadget version instead (last option under Appearance on the gadgets tab). That version is dismissable (and also includes a diff link). Not sure why the alert would be interfering with AWB though. Kaldari (talk) 07:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Upon doing as you described, I get a new bug:


 * This actually prevents me from clicking on the link to my userpage, the x to dismiss the message, and the view changes button. Technical 13 (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Ack, got bitten by my own bug fix. It should behave better now. If the overlap is still a problem, you may want to try out the User:Kaldari/bottomalert.js user script instead. Kaldari (talk) 21:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

RfC on title of Sarah Brown (wife of Gordon Brown)
Hi, this is to let everyone who commented in the last RM know that there's another RM/RfC here, in case you'd like to comment again. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Gibraltar
Kaldari, with regard to the present discussion on Jimbo's talk, and this earlier discussion on your talk page, please note background info provided here. Regards, Andreas JN 466 09:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

breakage in "thanks" extension
presuming you are the same Kaldari as mw:User:Kaldari, please read mw:User talk:Kaldari. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Trick My Truck-320x240.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Trick My Truck-320x240.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:03, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Drowning Girl at WP:FAC
Given your involvement in Featured article candidates/Look Mickey/archive1, I thought you might want to get involved in Featured article candidates/Drowning Girl/archive1‎, which could use some feedback.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply to discussion
I've mentioned you in the following discussion. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:23, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Notices
I hope you don't mind a quick question. I get around 20 to 40 mention notices per day when AnomieBot closes the FFDs and PUFs I've deleted. Is there any way to get rid of these bot notices so I can see only mentions by editors? Thanks for your time. INeverCry  17:49, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You could suggest User:AnomieBOT be added to the MediaWiki:Echo-blacklist. I know that you can add it yourself, but considering the "newness" of the feature, I would think that a three to seven day open discussion on the blacklist's talkpage would be appropriate. Technical 13 (talk) 17:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I would suggest adding it to MediaWiki:Echo-blacklist. Kaldari (talk) 18:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for the quick responses. Rather than post on the talkpage there, and wait through a discussion, or risk offending the bot's owner by adding it directly, I've decided to just disable mentions in my preferences.  INeverCry   18:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * , you probably won't get this ping, so I'll leave a talkback too... The other option, if I understand, is to get have  mark closes at FFD and PUF as minor bot edits, then it shouldn't trigger notifications. Technical 13 (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If he sees this and wants to do so, that's ok, but I'm not going to bug him about it. I haven't really seen any benefit from mentions notices, so I don't mind having it turned off.  INeverCry   22:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter
We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to  for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, and  being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 10:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

American punctuation causing ambiguity--your experience would be relevant
On the RfC about whether the ban of American punctuation should be lifted you said, "AS/TQ causes too many problems with ambiguity."

So you've seen cases of American punctuation causing ambiguity? We've got a pretty substantial |thread discussion of whether or not there is any evidence that American punctuation causes ambiguity or errors, and no one's been able to show us a non-hypothetical case yet. If you've seen American punctuation cause any problems, on Wikipedia or off, please come and outline them. It would be relevant. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Wife selling
In 2011, you participated in a deletion discussion re: wife selling. I believe the article should be revisited to assess whether concerns about synth and scope have come to fruition. My own concerns, expressed most recently here, are based on the material pertaining to ancient Rome, the area in which I mainly contribute; I'm hoping to have some input from other perspectives. Several people participated in the AfD, but since I don't wish to canvass, let me explain that I'm contacting only you and the former as the two other editors who followed up actively on the talk page. I may be overreacting. Cynwolfe (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that article is a complete mess. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. Kaldari (talk) 06:12, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm not sure I'm psychologically prepared to dig in. I seem to be in a rather irritable mood these days, and if I can't keep from being snappish, I shouldn't continue to participate in the discussion. I can see that the information on ancient Rome is taken out of context and "synth"ed to support a desired thesis on "wife selling", so I'm thinking this could be the case throughout. However, I've been ineffective in addressing the aspect of the topic most familiar to me, so I can't imagine taking on anything else. Thanks for taking a look. If you have a suggestion on proceeding, I'm not washing my hands of it. Just not wanting to butt heads pointlessly. Best, Cynwolfe (talk) 20:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
buffbills7701 15:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's currently leads overall, while Pool B's  is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today,, with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by, and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by, and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Regarding your comment at Wikipedia talk:UuU
Hello! Could you clarify what you mean with your comment at Wikipedia talk:UuU? Thanks in advance, Hey  mid  (contribs) 20:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hakka Default interface font
Hi Kaldari,

I have added this font to the Hakka Wikipedia Main Page.

This font

We wish to have this font as the default font setting for all the pages on Hakka Wikipedia so that all Hakka chinese character articles can be displayed more clearly.

Could you please help us add in that font?

You have our full permission to implement it on our behalf. It will greatly enhance the readibility of the articles.

Thanks in advance. --Hak-kâ-ngìn (talk) 06:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NRHP row2
Template:NRHP row2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:56, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 06:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: Feminism
Please understand that it's not a POV claim. The last reverter claimed that the sources are not reliable, which I can't really contest as I'm not familiar with the relevant WikiProjects' requirements, but that's different from being absent. In my personal life, I happen to think men's rights concerns are underrepresented (although not really the job of the feminist movement), but if I had nothing but my own insights I'd take the issue somewhere other than Wikipedia. Tezero (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Spotted !
This article in French press with a photo of you (with no licence, but enough information to track you :)): . This article is about this project reported on the BBC, itself related to this application of citizen science (in UK, not in SF :)). Given that you seem to be a spider fan, I thought I could just mention it to you :) Cheers Anthere (talk) 13:43, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings
Thanks a lot of making the title to Rape in Egypt, in fact i had made the page with such title, and quickly requested to change it back, i ask you to have a look at this page too, called "Rape in Saudi Arabia", and add something to it's talk page, as i really got no idea what to do there. Thanks OccultZone (talk) 04:57, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Elements and the Hot articles bot
WikiProject_Elements/Hot_articles has not been updated sine 23. June. Is this a general problem or only one for

WikiProject Elements. Thanks --Stone (talk) 09:48, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Stone, a few things changed when the bot was migrated from the toolserver to tool labs and it looks like this broke generating the data for WikiProject Elements. I'll try to look into it further tonite. Kaldari (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Stone (talk) 20:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Any clue what happened? --Stone (talk) 18:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks like I'm going to have to make some modifications to the script. Hopefully I can work on it some this weekend. If you don't hear anything back, just keep bugging me :) Kaldari (talk) 06:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I will! Good luck! --Stone (talk) 09:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks!!!!!!!!---Stone (talk) 08:21, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573094371 your edit] to Georgi Stabovi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * * П.К.П. (Пилсудский купил Петлюру) (P.K.P. (Pilsudski Bought Petliura)) (1926)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573975659 your edit] to Feminism and equality may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page]. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

NEED YOUR HELP
Please i have a project that is harnessing the mediawiki platform and we will need your help in terms of further extension of the platform, please just reply me here: info@christiansimon.me so i can give your more details about the project. Hope to hear from you soon. Kinds Regards Christian Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Microbiros (talk • contribs) 23:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Could you give me a bit more information first? Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Carlos-Smith.jpg
A file you have been previously involved with is under discussion at Trackinfo (talk) 07:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

bug 6200 and quote templates.
I'm assume that newlines should work correctly in quote templates and blockquote? Because...

Doesn't work: "This is a test

of the emergency broadcast system"

Works: "This is a test

of the emergency broadcast system"

Doesn't work: This is a test

of the emergency broadcast system Works: This is a test

of the emergency broadcast system

Works: aaaaa

bbbbb

ccccc

What is going on here? Bgwhite (talk) 06:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. I've added a workaround to the templates for the time being. Hopefully this will be fixed soon. Kaldari (talk) 07:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I see you reported it in bugzilla too.  I was describing the problem earlier today on a talk page, but stepped away for several hours.  When I returned, the examples I gave started working.  I looked at the bugzilla report and was shocked.  I've been following this for several years. I was upset that patch got submitted and nothing happened for two years.  Visual Editor runs into this bug and things got fixed fast.  Nice to know VE is useful for something.  Now if newlines could work in  and Image/File tags. Bgwhite (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Newpage bug
At the Signpost, you claimed that the "newpage bug" doesn't affect Special:NewPagesFeed. I think this is incorrect though. I tried to find Mathur, Krishnagiri in the feed, but couldn't find it at either the original creation time or the move to mainspace time. Are you sure that the newpage bug is fixed in the feed? Fram (talk) 13:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It may have been changed since I worked on the extension, but I know it specifically listed moved pages as of a year ago. See https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36930. Kaldari (talk) 18:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I mentioned this at that bug and reopened it. Fram (talk) 06:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Reffing
Hi Kaldari! Do you know if any of the people who've been hacking on the ref toolbar are contributing to the ref interface designs for VE? It would be lovely to preserve and port all of that interface goodness and related knowledge. Warmly, – SJ  +  20:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Not to my knowledge. I believe Mr.Z-man did most of the work on that. I agree it would be good to get his input on the feature. Kaldari (talk) 04:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Your photographs are beautiful!
Just wanted to thank you for adding such great photos of Tennessee natives! I'm obsessed with rare plants, so its great to see those Astragalus bibullatus photos. :)Masebrock (talk) 03:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Questions about "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" article
For several years, this article had a "Usage in Popular Culture" section. While there were some issues, many of the entries were actually sourced. You claimed in the article's Talk page that the section was unnecessary, stating that it was full of cruft. I wanted to know, why was it considered cruft? Many articles have pop culture sections that list movies and media where the article's subject is portrayed in other media. What is the difference between this pop culture section and that of other articles? Another question is the history section. It references a lot of books and media where the phrase is used, yet that is not considered cruft. What is the difference? Any general suggestions in making effective pop culture sections? You may leave your responses here, or on my talk page.

Additionally, there was a claim earlier that the phrase was used in the visual arts, yet another editor said that it is not in the visual arts, except for the pop cultural references. Isn't art in pop culture a form of "art", even if it is not a major artist like Picasso or Monet?

Thank you for your time.

OxbowsLake (talk) 14:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The section as written was nothing but a list of disconnected facts. As WP:INDISCRIMINATE states, "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context." Take a look at Zombies. That section is actually written as coherent prose that gives a well thought out overview of how the depiction of zombies in popular culture has evolved over the past century. It is not simply a list of every time a zombie was mentioned in a TV show or comic book. Such indiscriminate lists are not encyclopedic and do not improve the quality of Wikipedia articles. Kaldari (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. So, it sounds like the History section stays because it gives coherent prose of the history of the phrase, but the pop culture section was lifted because it was too disconnected. Am I right?

If somebody was to make a coherent description of the phrase's use in pop culture would it have a better chance of staying?

Again, thanks. OxbowsLake (talk) 22:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely. I'm not opposed to 'In popular culture' sections. The problem with most of them though is that they start as a few random disconnected facts which then becomes a cruft magnet for more people to add more random disconnected facts, with no regard for what information might actually be notable and encyclopedic, and no coherent narrative to contribute to the larger article. Kaldari (talk) 23:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I am now trying to find some examples to use for a more coherent coverage of the popular culture. Do you have any more advice on how to pick good examples and avoid cruft ones?

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

rape category removal
There is no BLP issue if the rape victim has talked about the rape, in a documentary they did about their life, a book they published, or interviews they have done, and its already mentioned in their article.  D r e a m Focus  12:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The BLP issue has nothing to do with verifiability. The issue is that some people object to being labelled as a "rape victim", regardless of whether they have been raped or not. Kaldari (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you sincerely believe that any of these people in question have objected to being called a rape victim? You aren't making any sense here.  They clearly identify themselves as someone who has been the victim of rape.    D r e a m Focus  22:19, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * With BLP issues, I prefer to err on the side of caution. If you've verified that these categorizations are appropriate, I'm fine with leaving them. Sorry to waste your time. Kaldari (talk) 22:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I am sympathetic to both viewpoints expressed here. Naming yourself as a victim of rape, in best-seller books that you wrote and published, is different than Wikipedia labeling you as a victim of rape. What if you prefer "rape survivor" or similar as a classification? What if "victim" is not what what you want to be known as? Binksternet (talk) 22:39, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Not everyone survives rape, so survivor doesn't work either, unless we want to categorize those who died differently... I'm hoping the category will be deleted, but it seems to be trending towards no consensus. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:17, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is. Our final nine were as follows:

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:


 * wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
 * wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
 * wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
 * wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
 * wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
 * wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
 * The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
 * Finally, the judges are awarding the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Euophryinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marma (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Beginning of MassMessage, end of EdwardsBot
Hi. You're being contacted as you're listed as an EdwardsBot user.

MassMessage has been deployed to all Wikimedia wikis. For help using the new tool, please check out its help page or drop a note on Meta-Wiki.

With over 400,000 edits to Wikimedia wikis, EdwardsBot has served us well; however EdwardsBot will no longer perform local or global message delivery after December 31, 2013.

A huge thanks to Legoktm, Reedy, Aaron Schulz and everyone else who helped to get MassMessage deployed. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:37, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

User:HotArticlesBot
Hey this looks really cool - would be of great utility on wikiproject birds, plants or astronomy - when could it be used for them (they have >2500 articles)? Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am also interested for the medicine wikiproject (~30000 articles). --WS (talk) 08:27, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, that is a good one to do too. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think WikiProject Medicine is going to be much too large (the query would be extremely expensive and tie up the server for a long time, likely resulting in the query being killed). The other suggestions are probably too large as well. I might be willing to try something with ~5000 articles and see what happens. Kaldari (talk) 08:58, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * If it takes too long, would it be possible to run it less often, once a week or so? Or is it not possible at all? In that case I would be interested if you know of any similar tools. Ideally would be something that not only takes into account the number of edits but also the amount of text changed in those edits... HotArticlesBot was the closest I could find so far. --WS (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I hadn't realised WikiProject Dinosaurs had so few - be good to do it for that one anyway. Just checking some options....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Right, so I've done this and made WikiProject Dinosaurs/Hot articles and put a link on WikiProject Dinosaurs...is that it? Does anything else need to happen? Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It's running now: WikiProject Dinosaurs Kaldari (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the expensiveness of the query increases dramatically the more articles there are. On the toolserver the script would just timeout after a few minutes. I've moved everything over to tool labs now, so it probably won't time out, but I still don't want to hog all the mySQL resources for a long time. Kaldari (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool - thanks for that! Please let us know when some tweak allows us to do it for a more populous wikiproject Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:34, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks! --WS (talk) 23:06, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

So, would the best option for larger wikiprojects be to set up task forces and run them on smaller subsets? Am I right in assuming that the memory needs rise exponentially with larger wikiprojects? (Every wikiproject I am interested in this for is too big, so thinking of ways around this! It is a great tool....) Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That is a possible workaround. The script can be run on any category (or template transclusion). The real solution would be for me to rewrite the script so that it processes the category in batches, rather than all at once. Kaldari (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. So I'll try and figure out some subcats in the meantime. But keen on ramping it up. It's a great tool and has yielded a bunch of dyks. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Ada Lovelace, deux
Hi Kaldari,

I posted this last week on my "talk" but did not know how to get to you and received an email from someone who gave me this link.

Here it is almost Thanksgiving but if you can consider this I would appreciate that. Have a happy Thanksgiving.

Dear Kaldari, I have reread the article and think you have done an excellent and outstanding job, though you will see I still have some issues. Could this be on the web site list?

Ada Lovelace, 1996 Oxford Dictionary of National Biography online http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/37253

I am sorry this is long but I hope you have the patience to read this. Once again though you have artfully edited what I wrote about functional equations I do believe my statement goes to the heart of why Ada's was so prescient, here it is again: When Ada had difficulty understanding functional equations, she wrote De Morgan; "functional Equations are complete Will-o-the-wisps to me. The moment I fancy I have really at last got hold of something tangible and substantial, it all recedes further and further and vanishes again in thin air". The difficulty in observation is termed "the collapse of the wave-function". It is fascinating that the collapse Ada feels in her verbal metaphor of tangibility is suggestive of a problem for the mathematical metaphors of modern physics.

I believe as written it does go to the heart of the matter .You replied that the reference to modern physics was a stretch but when Sir Drummond Bone, master of Balliol College, oxford, and my first editor, and also Dr Mel Schwartz who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1988 thought what I wrote straight on target I can not help but wonder what your expertise is in physics is. When I was writing this article, through Mel, I met three other Nobel recipients in Physics and we discussed this idea and they all agreed with my perception.

Next issue: a minor, but very important correction Lord and Lady Byron did not divorce, they separated.

Now as to copyright infringement and that is easy to fix. This is an encyclopedia and people are relying on you for accurate information, which means citing always as close to the original source ( that was Babbage's motivation for developing the engine) and also ends up to be not promoting one author over another. I did submit three authors that need to be credited Elwin, Marchand and Moore's, instead of so many Woolley citations. I can give you the ISBN numbers.

And the last issue is Collier's outrageous analysis of Ada's mental health. Those few lines, outside not being true are offensive and "Ada bashing" and really are not appropriate for a technologist of Colliers authority.

What if I put on Turing's biography, he was gay, depressed and committed suicide, instead of "because Turing was homosexual he was the victim of harassment which led to his death by suicide".

Fixing those Woolley references I know is time consuming but it will raise the level of this biography and not be promoting one author.

I thank you for doing the work you are doing. I think my third book, the e-book is the most important because it includes puzzles and games to broaden people's vision from a categorical thinker to an integrative one. Of course I would like you to list it. Unfortunately or fortunately I have done 4 books, perhaps 30 articles, even helped Google with the Google Doodle and once again this is not for self promotion, or even promoting Ada as the "statute of liberty' of computing, but rather hopefully to use Ada's skills to help us "Brain Gain" in this computer age, Thank you, Betty Alexandra TooleB.A. Toole (talk) 18:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello Betty, since you have a lot of questions, I'll visit your talkpage to see if I can help. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

place of death relevant?
Hello Kaldari, somebody with jersey-number 31 put this into the Ada article, which was later reverted because they accidentally messed up the infoboxen in the process. Can you take a peek at it, and make the call on whether Marylebone is a wp:Noteworthy factoid, please? p.s. Also, congratulations on your Medal First Class For Service Above And Beyond The Call Of Duty To Pillar Four, much appreciated. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 23:03, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

A question about Popular Culture Lists
I have a new question about Popular Culture sections.

Going around Wikipedia, I noticed the "Roy G. Biv" article which has a list-style popular culture section. It is shown here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROYGBIV It seems to be well-received and it the editors don't seem to want to delete it. However, the popular culture of "The quick brown fox" seemed to be frequently deleted and restored, until it was removed for good. I understand that prose-style pop culture sections, like the one on zombies, seem to work well, but I want to know what is the difference between the Roy. G. Biv pop culture list, and the Quick Brown Fox pop culture list, being that both are lists of disconnected facts?

Roy G Biv link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROYGBIV

Quick brown fox past edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_quick_brown_fox_jumps_over_the_lazy_dog&diff=prev&oldid=567566743

What makes Roy G Biv better than Quick brown fox?

OxbowsLake (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If it's going to be a list, it needs to be a definitive list. If it would be impossible to make a definitive list, it needs to be prose. For example, it would be impossible to list every use of zombies in popular culture, so a list would just be random examples. At least that's my take on it. Kaldari (talk) 21:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Jesus
"as the definition of "builder" is not normally distinct from "carpenter"", well yes it is, in countries where houses are not mainly made from wood, like Palestine. Johnbod (talk) 03:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That may be true, but most of our readers are not Palestinian, so I imagine the sentence will be confusing to many, as it was to me. Feel free to revert it, though, if you feel it was important. Kaldari (talk) 03:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps it could be changed to "stone builder"? Kaldari (talk) 03:26, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Please
Two things. Could you please ask a user prior to accusing him/her of a massive copyright violation? This is a public domain, as has been discussed with User:Coren and included in the list operated by his bot. I could easily explain if you asked me. More important, could you please respect WP:Outing? Privacy is not a very serious consideration to me, but I still prefer to appear as an anonymous user. Please oversight the record where your indicated my real life name, which was at best unnecessary. Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 06:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, after doing more digging, I discovered that InterPro is considered public domain. In the future, I would suggest crediting sources that you copy material from, even if they are public domain. That will prevent any confusion. I apologize for not asking you about it first, but I didn't discover your active account until after I had already posted the accusations. It would be helpful if you linked from your previous accounts to your currently active account. I'll see if I can delete the revs that include your real name. Kaldari (talk) 06:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * During creation all these articles included the required reference to public domain (This article incorporates text from the public domain Pfam and InterPro IPR021091, as for example in here). Otherwise, the article would be automatically detected by CorenBot and deleted. I usually checked InterPro texts to fix errors. This all comes from here, which I believe is beneficial for the project. However, I already exhausted my limit of time and patience... Happy New Year! My very best wishes (talk) 07:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That statement is not accurate. The article that started this mess, Cytochrome c oxidase subunit I did not include such a notice until I added it yesterday. It was not until I checked several more of your articles that I saw the notice and realized that the source was public domain. Kaldari (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right. I probably missed it for this protein family when combined the initial text from two program-generated files. Sorry, my mistake. My very best wishes (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Now, speaking of another copyright issue, this is kind of complicated. These files have been actually deleted on Commons, although one of admins there suggested a deletion review later if I am not mistaken. I do believe the copyright holder was Jamestown foundation because the paintings were published by Jamestown foundation, and they wrote: "yes, you can use them" [in Wikimedia]. Also, three images were initially placed on wiki by this user who posted the following quote from his email: You do have our permission. Just be sure to mention Jamestown as a source in the Wikipedia listing, and reference us with a web link to the paintings in your posting. Use this email as our special authorization. Thanks, Glen Howard, President, Jamestown Foundation, 6/14/2006. If we can AGF this (and I also checked that they allow using these images), this should be enough I hope... My very best wishes (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I replied at the deletion discussion. Kaldari (talk) 19:07, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Content from DV Page
Could you explain to me why the content that I added to the Domestic Violence page earlier today was removed? Your comment says that I was "conflating two completely different statistics in a way that is contradictory and confusing." What two statistics was I conflating and in what way was it confusing?

DGAgainstDV (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * See the talk page. I was just about to message you. Kaldari (talk) 22:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Is it time for a periodic FAR.
Hello User:Kaldari, Your Talk entry listed an interest in "Major Depressive Disorders" which has not been reviewed since 2008 and which is listed for "WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology." Is it time for a periodic review and could you list it? BillMoyers (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Steatoda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black widow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: History of women in Puerto Rico
&mdash;Ahnoneemoos (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Lists of Salticidae species
As I tried to point out several days ago, this AFD is incomplete because all you've listed and tagged is the master index. None of the actual list pages, such as List of Salticidae species (A–C), are tagged or included in this nomination, so as it stands it's not going to accomplish anything, and there's no argument for deleting the index but not the actual lists. postdlf (talk) 22:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I know, I keep meaning to add the other articles, but I just haven't had time. Kaldari (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll relist the discussion once you do. postdlf (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Please read WP:MEDRS
Thanks Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 09:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * What you are adding are not recent secondary sources. The types of sources we are looking for are 1) review articles 2) major medical textbooks 3) position statements from national bodies. All should be from the last 5 years or so. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 09:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Set: W. Russell Flint's illustrations to Princess Ida
I've responded to you here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've checked them. I'm afraid I think that they're acccurate, even after shining as many lights on the book as I could. It's a ways off, but presuming I get to go to the next Wikimania, I'm inclined to bring this book. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2014 (UTC)