User talk:Kiore/Archive 2

Hello Kiore, thx for your help on Gerrit Wartenaar. I like your userpage, how are you, living downunder? Taksen(talk) 12:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I think if I'd counted how many links to the Zealand page I wouldn't have started disambiguating them.Kiore (talk) 12:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Australian voting system in Pukeko
Can we move this discussion back to the article please? I can't see any point splitting it across multiple pages.Kiore (talk) 03:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want. It didn't seem very relevant to the discussion about what to actually do with Pukeko. From what you've described above it seems that those in favour of keeping the article have an advantage, but, whatever. Enough people seem determined to keep something anyway. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  03:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Surely that just makes consensus utterly indeterminable? I mean, if the article isn't merged (and dagnabbit there seem to be enough people who want to keep the worthless thing) there are also now almost equal numbers of votes for keeping it as a subspecies article as there are for just about Pukekos. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  01:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * When there's three options and you are asked to pick only one it isn't consensus. As long as the votes go 1,2,3 (or 1,2) it's easy: allocate first preferences, eliminate the lowest polled candidate and add their second preferences to the appropriate tally. It's not difficult and the average Australian voter understand it better than NZ media affect to understand MMP.Kiore (talk) 03:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, and I believe I've discussed this with you (or others on WP:NZ before, but surely Pukeko us as acceptable, if not more, than Pūkeko in English (as opposed to in Maori, where it would be correct). Loanwords tend to get beaten a little when they get absorbed, and the English speakers and writers have never had much truck with inflections (I've certainly always been glad we aren't afflicted with them, I always hated trying to remember which way the fleck went in French classes). It is certainly the case that most people I know here in Wellington don't use them if the word has been thoroughly absorbed (Kereu, Kaka, or for that matter Maori). Sabine's Sunbird  talk  00:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * (hope this is not a private conversation :-) I get the impression that there is a bit of a move to pronounce Maori words properly, especially in technical literature relating to flora/fauna. After all Maori is an official national language and can be used in all contexts, so as a nation why would we use a corrupted/anglosised loan word instead of the real thing :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 00:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The inflections aren't any help if you don't know how to read them. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  01:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As I said there, Pukeko's acceptable to me. Stop trying to find additional difficulties.Kiore (talk) 03:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to find additional difficulties, so sorry if it came across that way. Sabine's Sunbird talk  03:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:67.242.56.62
This guy isn't new here. Appearances can be decieving, especially on an anon-IP talkpage. But rest assured, this isn't a school IP. It's one guy. And if you take a look at his edits, he's no stranger to swapping out genres in Foo Fighters articles. He's hot off the heels of his latest block for EXACTLY the edit you reverted, and others just like it, so if you know anyone who can expedite his re-blocking, I'd be much obliged. --King ♣ Talk  19:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi King ♣, I read the talk page, including your comment before adding my warning and I could feel the frustration in your words. I still add these warnings in cases like this because that way when an admin reviews the page it's obvious that there have been warnings about lapses in editing sense. Your posting on Tan's talk page seems to have done the job of getting an admin on the case, I'm just an ordinary editor (actually more of a subeditor as I mainly fix obvious typos and revert obvious vandalism than anything that can be seriously called editing) and couldn't do much more than that myself, although I tend to put my requests for help on Administrator intervention against vandalism rather than researching to find is there were previously involved administrators. Best wishes Kiore (talk) 00:14, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Tan handled it about a half hour after I logged out. I WOULD use AIV, but it's really more for blatant vandalism, rather than long-term genre warring. (This guy has actually bounced off AIV before with a ruling of "Not vandalism". He wasn't actually blocked the first time until he violated 3RR).
 * Thanks for you input. It's been a rollercoaster with this guy. --King ♣  Talk  12:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "It's been a rollercoaster with this guy" I've just read through some of the old talk pages for this IP and the blocked user. She certainly seems to be obsessed with the subject. I assume she'll find a new IP address before the 6 months ban is up.Kiore (talk) 06:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * He posted as... what, Mike? ...Or something on another forum (revealed during the original meatpuppet investigation a year ago), which is why I say "he". And I have no doubt he'll be back at some point. I'm not sure why he bothers, his edits don't stay up for more than 10 minutes now.
 * Oh well, my watchlist is primed and ready to go, and I've got a couple doors to knock on for bannings. --King ♣  Talk  16:29, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

MaraDNS and third-party sources
User:Theserialcomma has brought up the legitimate concern that the MaraDNS article doesn’t mention third-party sources discussing MaraDNS’ notability; in response I have added third-party sources that mention MaraDNS to the article and toTalk:MaraDNS. If you have a chance, look at the article and decide whether these third-party sources establish notability. Samboy (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi There. I've had a look at the article and couldn't agree with you that was sufficient 3rd party interest cited to establish notability, so I tracked down one more for the article & I believe it should now pass muster, just.
 * BTW: I'm currently on sabatical from Wikipedia for a bit while I work on a software project of my own, so I'm only popping in when I want to look something up (Reverting to user mode) so please don't expect speedy replies Kiore (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Auckland Meetup 5 on 9 May 2010
You are invited to Auckland Meetup 5 on the afternoon of Sunday 9th May 2010 at Esquires Cafe, Ground Floor, Auckland Central City Library, Lorne St, Auckland. Please see Meetup/Auckland 5 for details and RSVP. You can also bookmark Meetup/Auckland to be informed of future NZ meetups. - Linnah (talk) 06:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Zori2.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:Zori2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Zori1.jpg
A tag has been placed on File:Zori1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject North America
76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'll pass. If I was going to get involved in a Wikiproject I'd prefer to work on something closer to home & I'm well aware there is a lot of work needed on New Zealand related articles.


 * Unfortunately more than 95% of my Wikipedia involvement is on reverting vandalism, so while I occasionally dip into an article or talk page and do something useful I'm more likely to be perusing recent change logs :( Bruce -- Kiore (talk) 09:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

NPOV
Hi Kiore. Are you quite sure you meant to do this? "Martyrdom" sounds a bit non-neutral. Favonian (talk) 20:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, you caught it. Thanks.  Favonian (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I intended to do the same revert you did. Not sure how I ended up reverting your revert ... lack of coffee perhaps . Sorry for the confusion. Kiore (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Sun Yet Sen, American
that is a famous rumor attacting Kuomintang Party from BBS, similar rumor say Ma Ying-jeou is american, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.176.42.242 (talk) 08:03, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

That may well be true, but as the claim is well referenced, you will need to find citations to support the other version Kiore (talk) 08:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Monarchies of Europe.
Vatican's position is not disputed. However, the Category:Vatican city already feeds into Monarchies of Europe. It was just a pointless duplication. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't realise that as there was nothing in your edit summary explaining why the change was made. I've reverted my change. Thanks Kiore (talk) 18:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Parallels Desktop for Mac
Thank you for correcting my correction! I had assumed that was just some sort of typo. Somehow I failed to realize the redundant phrasing that resulted from my change. Thanks for picking up on that. --Alex Rosenberg (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright reversion of Monosaccharide
Thanks for doing this. But just one small point, it would be cool if whatever tool you were using could add a comment to the edit summary as I almost revert the reversion because it looked like vandalism. Ianmc (talk) 21:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the edit log I left the summary "Reverted 1 edit by 202.78.91.181 (talk); Suspect copy vio. See talk page. (TW)" and explained in more detail on the article's talk page. Hard to see what more I could have done. Kiore (talk) 10:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree but from the perspective of my watchlist the copy vio edit description is missing. I have no idea why of course :-) Ianmc (talk) 21:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand what's happened. You're looking at Monosaccharide while I edited Carbohydrate. IP User 202.78.91.181 edited both pages:
 * Added the text to Monosaccharide
 * Reverted their own edit to Monosaccharide
 * Added the text to Carbohydrate (Which I reverted).
 * Hope that helps Kiore (talk) 23:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Last North American veterans by war listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Last North American veterans by war. Since you had some involvement with the Last North American veterans by war redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   01:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Kiore (talk) 03:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine
Hi, Kiroe. I noticed you marked this as vandalism using Twinkle. This isn't vandalism but rather a content dispute. I agree with the revert but I would caution you to only click on the vandalism button when it is clearly vandalism. Basket of Puppies 15:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That wasn't careless, the change was
 * a first change by an IP user
 * making an unexplained major change to "facts" already on the page
 * No edit summary,
 * Appeared to be "Adding [...] patent nonsense to pages" (per WP:VANDAL).
 * It simply looked like vandalism. It was a pending revision & selecting a vandalism roll-back rather than a pending change not-approve was a deliberate choice and not a default one. OK, I didn't realise this was part of a content dispute, but there wasn't really anything to tell me it was.Kiore (talk) 18:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Kiroe, I suggest you go to WP:VANDAL and read up on it. The edits that were made weren't vandalistic but disputed. If edits from an IP with no edit summary was the threshold for vandalism then a huge % of wiki edits were would automatically reverted as vandalism. Have a great day! Basket of Puppies  19:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * And I suggest that you read before you write.
 * My logon is Kiore ... Once could have been a typo, twice shows you are being deliberately incivil in violation of WP:CIVIL "a studied pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable,"
 * There were 4 items I pointed out as collectively adding towards my assuming it was vandalism, you selectively picked two. One of the ones you chose to ignore was a direct quote from WP:VANDAL -- I suggest you go to WP:VANDAL and read up on it -- my point was that if any of the other three items wasn't there I probably would have given the benefit of the doubt. Kiore (talk) 05:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There's nothing more here to discuss. I'll be monitoring your use of Twinkle for misuse and will report it to ANI once it appears you do not understand the proper use of twinkle. Until then, please read WP:VANDAL and WP:AGF before making any additional edits. Good day. Basket of Puppies  17:45, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I have already read those, and as you saw above was making direct quotes from one of them, a point you have repeatedly chosen to ignore. You are right, there is nothing more to discuss here because this is largely a product of your imagination and your issuing of inappropriate threats hardly helps your case.Kiore (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)