User talk:Martijn Hoekstra/Archives/2013/May

Melding over vertaling: Single User Login finalisation announcement/Personal announcement
Hallo Martijn Hoekstra,

U ontvangt deze melding omdat u zich heeft opgegeven als vertaler voor het Nederlands op Meta. De pagina Single User Login finalisation announcement/Personal announcement is beschikbaar voor vertaling. Vertaal deze alstublieft hier:
 * vertalen in het Nederlands

De prioriteit voor deze pagina is hoog. De deadline voor het vertalen van deze pagina is 2013-05-13.

Uw hulp wordt enorm op prijs gesteld. Met vertalers zoals u is Meta een echte meertalige gemeenschap.

Bedankt!

Vertalingenbeheerders van Meta&lrm;, 08:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

AFCH

 * [00:09] I need for the AFC helper script a check if a user was renamed. no problem, simply add &redirects= to the parameter url, but sadly if the user page is not a redirect, the MW API doesn't give me the 'from' and the 'to' normalizied forms see
 * [00:09] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ApiSandbox#action=query&prop=revisions&format=json&rvprop=content&rvlimit=10&indexpageids=&titles=User%20talk%3AMabdul&redirects=
 * [00:09] (use wikignome instead for the working example)
 * [00:10] how do i detect that the JQUERY "normalized" stuff is not available?
 * [00:11] It would be much more easily if it is placed although it didn't change... XD
 * [00:11] my script is at User:Mabdul/afc_beta.js; search for "redirectchecker"

Just an IRC log; can you help me with that? mabdul 22:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * will check. My first thought is it may be intentional fir this to be hard, for privacy and right to vanish stuff. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 06:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Uhm, if a redirect is created (and it is logged in the user rename log) then this should be OK. Moreover is AfC mostly used by newbies which often violating WP:U and thus getting renamed after request. mabdul 10:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Just FYI: for the case you invested some time: thanks, but I have resolved the problem by simply giving the API as requested page User_talk:USERNAME instead of User talk:USERNAME (as this is always giving a harmonized version with a whitespace)
 * Although, just if you found a solution: I still might need it for another problem... mabdul 23:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 02:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

R.S. Rodger entry
Hello again Martijn,

This is a copy of our last previous correspondence regarding an "R.S. Rodger" entry that you originally suggested back in January: When you are able, would you please read the material on my sandbox page and let me know if there will be any possible way to get an R.S. Rodger entry approved for inclusion on Wikipedia. Thanks for your help with this possibility, or at least a response indicating that it will be a lost cause. HamiltonRoberts (talk) 18:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC) Hi Hamilton, I took a quick look but apart from the style issues (and you probably know they're there) I have to do more research if the article meets WP:BIO. If you have any sources about Rodger I could take along with that would be appreciated. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I do have one external source (http://dfa.ns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/DOC082.pdf) that deals with one part of the material, but that isn't enough to help much I'm sure. HamiltonRoberts (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

If is is possible to modify the autobiographical material that Bob Rodger wrote and thereby have it accepted as a Wikipedia entry, would you please indicate just what changes will be required. I would greatly appreciate your help in getting a scaled-down version that will meet with your approval. Thanks. HamiltonRoberts (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Hamilton, sorry for getting back so late. I've tossed this around among a few other people, and what I generally feel is that there isn't enough verifiable information here to get this off the ground as more than a paragraph worth. On regards of what we call notability (a word I hate in this context, because it sounds like we are passing some sort of judgement, while we basically only look at independent sources providing coverage), it's hard. Inclusion is ultimately decided by our deletion process, once an article is created, it may get deleted through that process, which is a community discussion. My guess - which is really no more or less than an educated guess - is that it would have about a 80% chance of getting deleted there. Being the former president of the DFA should - at least I have the feeling it should - count for something, but then again, if the position is so important, the argument generally goes, why haven't others written about it. When I look at the actual guidelines we have, I take a look at WP:PROF, and I can't find any evidence he meets any of those criteria, though I can't properly judge criterium 1.  The document you present unfortunately isn't indpendent, so though it can be used for simple facts, it's not taken in to account in the general WP:BIO guidelines Googling about for aditional sources, I find for example http://books.google.com/books?id=eX6biaolqaMC&pg=PA385&lpg=PA385&dq=r+s+rodger&source=bl&ots=tLIFX3Fm85&sig=sCng1wFcmnLOUuREZgdP-xugJdc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=i-CbUbnpI8XxPKCKgbAF&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=r%20s%20rodger&f=false but that is pretty much the textbook definition of what our guidelines condescendingly call 'trivial coverage'. So all in all, if you were to write an article, from the sources that I have seen, all that could be written would be the basic facts (date and location of birth and positions, and a mention of rodger's method), and I can't say with anything even resembling certainty that it will stand. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Diesel exhaust, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page IARC (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) 23:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Invensis
I'm conflicted about Invensis. If the company is as it is described, it may meet WP:N but it may not. However, I'd hoped the author or someone monitoring WikiProject India would've uploaded more material by now so WP:V and WP:N were no longer issues. I'm inclined to wait until a day or two before the PROD expires and if there's no obvious reason to "keep" it, de-prod it and send it to AFD for a deeper discussion. On the other hand, I could just let the PROD expire and wait for the editor to ask for a WP:REFUND, but we might be losing a needed article in the meantime. Please keep an eye on this and if it goes to AFD, chime in with your opinions one way or the other. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:14, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi David, I suspect the organisation in wholly non-notable. On the other hand, PROD is intended to be a light process, for this presumed non-controversial. If someone disagrees, the PROD is invalid. If you're not sure, by all means go ahead and de-prod, that's what the process is meant for. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Melding over vertaling: Wikimedia Highlights, April 2013
Hallo Martijn Hoekstra,

U ontvangt deze melding omdat u zich heeft opgegeven als vertaler voor het Nederlands op Meta. De pagina Wikimedia Highlights, April 2013 is beschikbaar voor vertaling. Vertaal deze alstublieft hier:
 * vertalen in het Nederlands

De prioriteit voor deze pagina is gemiddeld.

Please help non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps.

If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at. You can manage your subscription at.

Uw hulp wordt enorm op prijs gesteld. Met vertalers zoals u is Meta een echte meertalige gemeenschap.

Bedankt!

Vertalingenbeheerders van Meta&lrm;, 23:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Aniek van Koot
Your work on the article looks pretty good. Let me be so bold as to suggest some additions to further improve the article: information about her life and tennis play before 2006 and a table with her (grand slam) titles. Perhaps her foundation for wheelchair tennis (Stichting Rolstoeltennis Aniek van Koot) should be also mentioned? Keep up the good work! – Editør (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Why thank you, but I think you're overestimating my involvement. I merely approved the article. If you feel the article should/can be improved, by all means go for it! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
BO &#124; Talk 00:58, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Melding over vertaling: Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Voter e-mail
Hallo Martijn Hoekstra,

U ontvangt deze melding omdat u zich heeft opgegeven als vertaler voor het Nederlands op Meta. De pagina Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Voter e-mail is beschikbaar voor vertaling. Vertaal deze alstublieft hier:
 * vertalen in het Nederlands

De prioriteit voor deze pagina is hoog. De deadline voor het vertalen van deze pagina is 2013-06-03.

Uw hulp wordt enorm op prijs gesteld. Met vertalers zoals u is Meta een echte meertalige gemeenschap.

Bedankt!

Vertalingenbeheerders van Meta&lrm;, 03:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hopes dashed?
Can't fault you for giving a guy the benefit of the doubt, but I'm afraid this may not be working out as well as you'd hoped. I won't relate my own opinion about what's really going on here -- I'm sure you can draw your own conclusion. (Not saying all these are bad behavior but the totality helps paint the picture.)      EEng (talk) 05:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me suffice with an "ugh" for now. I'll get back to this tonight CET. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 08:25, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * By cosmic accident ran into this as well, which reminded me I forgot to include these  in the original list -- this seems to be his main preoccupation, as a substantial proportion of his posts take the form of warning others to tread lightly, since he has personal knowledge of how easy it is to be "banned" for doing nothing wrong by power-drunk admins. Here he tells someone that some arbitration "went in his favor". Huh? EEng (talk) 03:00, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Melding over vertaling: User:SamoaBot/Wikidata Summary/translate
Hallo Martijn Hoekstra,

U ontvangt deze melding omdat u zich heeft opgegeven als vertaler voor het Nederlands op Meta. De pagina User:SamoaBot/Wikidata Summary/translate is beschikbaar voor vertaling. Vertaal deze alstublieft hier:
 * vertalen in het Nederlands

De prioriteit voor deze pagina is laag.

It is a new and improved version of User:Addbot/Wikidata Summary, featuring full support for "plural" directives and a new "$user" variable. We are working on enabling these summaries for all "new-generation" interwiki bots.

Uw hulp wordt enorm op prijs gesteld. Met vertalers zoals u is Meta een echte meertalige gemeenschap.

Bedankt!

Vertalingenbeheerders van Meta&lrm;, 07:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nou Martijn, dat ziet er echt ontzettend spannend uit. Drmies (talk) 03:02, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Reken maar! Wie wil dat niet! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ Mahmoud Abo-Elnasr
Hi Martijn, I am curious about this speedy deletion of an article in AfC. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of AfC? Why not just decline the article and give reasons? Best, heather walls (talk) 21:51, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi heather, G11 for AfC is indeed a bit contentious (which is why I prefer tagging only, and let another admin have a second look). There is some discussion over on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. My own point of view is that we are generally not doing the drafter a favour by just declining. As the G11 criterion demands that the article is written in such a way that it needs to be completely re-written to become encyclopedic, the drafter should just start over, rather than working based on what is already there. If we just decline the article, that would give out the wrong signal. I can see literally no reason not to speedily delete the content. Feel free to let me know why I'm wrong though, and do give your thoughts on the CSD talk page. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:07, 31 May 2013 (UTC)