User talk:Mufka/Archive 3

Yes I'm leaving
I'm tired of banging my head against the wall. I started to contribute to Wikipedia with the intention of helping to improve the articles. All I find myself doing is undoing vandalism, day after day without end. Its like that story (sorry can't remember the name) where they guy is pushing the boulder up a hill, when he takes a break the boulder rolls back to the bottom and he has to start over. If the boulder wants to stay at the bottom, let it, I'm not pushing it any more.

Thats not to say that I'm completely done with Wikipedia, but I am done with the WP:DAYS articles.

And no, the project won't fail. You can handle it incredibly well. Also there are other editors who havn't listed themselves on the project page that help as well.

I wish you Good luck in your endevours. Grouf(talk • contribs) 17:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sisyphus, and as a editor who tries to maintain both WP:DAYS and WP:YEARS articles, I appreciate the work you've done. Good luck in your endevours, on and off Wikipedia. &mdash; Arthur Rubin  (talk) 18:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Believe me, I know what you mean. I feel the same way.  My big concern is that there are not many editors who are willing to argue for policy.  Every day I tell myself I won't look at the vandalism, just at how the policy should be viewed.  Usually I get sucked in reverting numerous entries that include the terms "hero, badass, legend, god, pimp, etc."  I won't last long at the fight if the WP:DOY doesn't get approved as policy.  Maybe I'll go back to writing articles.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it's time to drum up support for flagged revisions or some other mechanism for keeping sewage out of the wine. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Another idea - is the vandalism on the DAYS articles regular enough to recognize automatically? I mean could you offer an explicit algorithm for determining with a high degree of confidence that some particular edit should be undone (if (this and this and this and this, or this and this and this and this, or ...))?  If so, we could probably get the patterns added to ClueBot and the other vandalism bots.  Even patterns that would catch some percentage would be a big help (right?).  -- Rick Block (talk) 01:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a bot in the works here but I haven't heard from the owner in over a month. That could take care of the vandalism, but I'm concerned about the guideline.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 01:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like the bot proposal is dead. Perhaps we can ask someone else to create one.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 03:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been pointed here - I'm really sorry it's taken so long - mixture of health problems and computer problems - but I'll try and get something going in the next couple of days Pseudomonas(talk) 10:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, Great! Glad to hear it. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've got the thing together, just awaiting re-activation of permission to run it. Pseudomonas(talk) 20:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Approved :) Hope it helps. I think it won't replace you though. Pseudomonas(talk) 13:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

About the guideline

 * I haven't paid much attention to the guideline lately - what do you think the current status is? I was instrumental in pushing Naming conventions (categories) to policy status (which is one of the more recent "by consensus" as opposed to "by Jimbo fiat" policies).  After a what seemed like dozens of archives of the talk page it eventually settled at a point most folks seemed to accept and I ended up asking user:Raul654 who, in the end, decides consensus has been achieved.  Rather than answer, he decided (and changed the "proposed" tag to "policy").  If you'd like I could read through the WP:DOY talk page and let you know whether it looks like all objections have been satisfied (might take a while).  What do you think?  Are there still outstanding objections?  A somewhat depressing note that seems to have been deleted from the "how to create policy" page is at the bottom of this version.  It was extremely difficult to get a new policy adopted by consensus two and half years ago.  I assume it's at least an order of magnitude more difficult now.  On the other hand, assuming it simply reflects current practice it really shouldn't be a big deal.  -- Rick Block (talk) 02:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I rearranged WP:DAYS and WP:DOY to reflect what is both longstanding practice and what has been discussed over the years on the talk pages. I don't think there are any disputed items that are included in the pages.  They may continue to evolve but there hasn't been any dispute over the content.  I don't know how to raise from proposed to policy but it seems to me there should be little resistance.  It was pointed out to me today (quite unceremoniously) that consensus hasn't been established in a discussion at Talk:October 31.  I would appreciate your review of the pages.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 02:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look (maybe over the weekend). In theory, anyone can decide there's a consensus (if there is, there won't be much resistance).  I'm an admin so, also in theory, could with some legitimacy change the tag from proposed to guideline.  I don't think it says so anywhere, but in reality it's probably better to get a bureaucrat (like Raul) to change the tag.  If it looks like consensus to me, I'll ask Raul to take a look as well. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

When's the last time something about this was posted at WP:VPP? Looking at the current talk page I see a number of what look like unresolved suggestions or objections (most of the "Up for discussion" items have very little discussion, pro or con, which argues against consensus - there's just too little discussion to call it either way). You might not like this, but I suggest to progress from here (assuming you're happy with the current state of WP:DOY) you should: One of the truly unfortunate aspects of this place is that you can't force people to comment, but if you don't get a reasonable number of comments you really can't claim consensus (for this, I'd think it would take comments from at least 6 folks and ideally more like 10).
 * 1) Archive the existing talk page.
 * 2) Add a new topic on the talk page that says something like "please comment on the guidelines below indicating your support or specific (actionable) objections" (the best model for this is WP:FAC).
 * 3) Add an announcement that you're seeking consensus for these guidelines at WP:VPP, WP:CENT, and WP:DAYS.
 * 4) Invite comments from folks who have expressed interest (on their talk page), specifically including folks who have previously voiced objections (I suspect you know any number of folks who regularly revert vandalism on these pages).
 * 5) Wait a week or two and see what kind of comments you get.

Does this seem like a reasonable approach? -- Rick Block (talk) 04:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If that's what it takes, I'm all for it. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 15:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've started the ball rolling on this. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Calendars
According to the history, you did the edits to the Calendar templates (eg. Template:MarchCalendar). These calendars used to float to the right, but now they are all on the left (not floating). Was there a reason for this change? —Mike 01:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The change was to make the calendars self maintaining (from year to year). The fact that the old versions were right floating was an unnecessary feature (it limited users of the template from putting it where they wanted to).  All of the main space pages that use the template have the right float set within the pages (and always have).  If you would like to use the template on your user page, you can set the float for your specific use on your page.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 03:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * That is true for many of the articles, but articles such as March and March 2008 would need to be changed. —Mike 18:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Since we're probably talking about 2 pages per template, I'd be willing to make the changes to the pages myself. I still think it's better to let it be done per page than with the template -- just in the event that someone wants to use the template somewhere else with a different alignment.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * By the way, March 2008 shouldn't be using the MarchCalendar template anyway. It will change next year.  It should use a static March 2008 calendar.  I'll change that too.  Someday I'll rewrite the month templates so that they default to the current year and can use parameters for other years.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 02:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sherman Act
Mufka, saw your WW tag on Sherman Act article. I've been trying to fix that article up. I didn't write that section of the old article, I inherited it when I rewrote the substantive part, and didn't want to make edits where I had an ideological COI or a non-neutral POV. Nevertheless, I agree with you that some rewriting was necessary, and I've tried to respond. Feel free to weigh in if you still have a stake. Non Curat Lex (talk) 05:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I hate to do content edits on articles that I haven't researched, but I thought it would be useful to point out something that a) wasn't referenced and b) used weasel words. I have a habit of getting sucked into researching the oddest things just to fix one sentence, so I might end up poking at it.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 15:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Robert Gibson
Hey, I already got that. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. I saw.  I promptly reverted my bad revert.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 15:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
You've got it now. :-) - Philippe  03:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

27 April
Thanks for your message - is the issue that it's linking to an external site (so I should create a Wikipedia page about World Tapir Day), or is it that you don't believe that the event is officially recognised by anyone? If the former, that's easy enough to fix; if the latter, I can provide evidence that the relevant bodies do recognise it. -- Captain_Potato 22:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think I've answered my own question (it's the former, isn't it?) - would the reference to World Tapir Day in the Tapir page be enough, or should I create its own (which I ought to do anyway, but time always gets in the way...) -- Captain_Potato 23:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It should really have an article of its own in order to be considered notable enough for inclusion as an observance. The exception to that is feast days which are listed in the subject's article.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, it appears that this is the first year that it will be observed. Since it hasn't occurred yet (or recurred), it really can't be listed as an observance.  It hasn't happened yet, so it is impossible to say that it will have global impact.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That's fine and makes sense - thanks. I'll wait until its own article exists. Even though it hasn't happened yet, once this page exists, it will be okay to include it then? In terms of its importance, for tapir conservation it is already having an impact through its fundraising (I'm coordinating it, so I've got a good idea), and we're working on promoting it to a wider audience than just the tapir community around the world (yes, there is one - mainly researchers and conservationists - but there are others, such as myself, who doesn't have the scientific background to help in that way). As you will have no doubt seen from the official page, tapir conservation is only part of the project - to protect tapirs, their wider ecosystems need to be protected, so the aims of World Tapir Day stretch far beyond tapirs as such.


 * Part of the reason for listing it now is because it's coming up soon (and why it wasn't added until now, even though it's been in planning for a while), so it would be useful to help promote it (especially when look at the page to see what events are happening on 27 April), so it's a bit of a vicious circle, I guess, if it couldn't be added until afterwards. I assumed that it fits because of its importance relative to World Graphic Design Day that *is* listed ;) As my re-edit comment suggested, I thought that you'd removed it was because I chose 1 April to add it :P -- Captain_Potato 01:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Since you are involved in organizing the event, you will need to watch WP:COI. This isn't a place to advertise a cause.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 01:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Will do - I agree, it isn't a place to advertise a cause (and that's not what I am doing - World Tapir Day exists to help with tapir conservation, not to flatter my (or anybody else's) ego). Every edit I've ever made on Wikipedia (either logged in or before I bothered to create an account) has been because I am interested in the topic (other than when I spot vandalism). My academic background is extensive enough to let me write neutrally about any matter. Having read WP:COI, I'll add my involvement to my User talk:Captain Potato page, and will be careful about anything I add.
 * Having said this, who edits a page on Wikipedia if they aren't interested in the topic (other than obsessive-compulsives, who will never be able to write everything on every topic ;) )? -- Captain_Potato 02:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

✅
Just wanted to let you know, I've fulfilled your bot request. Enjoy! SQL Query me! 11:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Turner Foundation
Hi, can you please tell if Turner Foundation website RS or not? I am a bit confused on it. I used it as reference in the article Operation Amba and want to use in Crime in Russia. I also like another opinion regarding Wildlife Alliance and Orangutan.com.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Turner Foundation has a Board of Trustees. Wildlife Alliance and Orangutan.com also have directorial teams . So I think these are RS. Still I will like another opinion.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 18:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * They look like reliable sources but as used in Operation Amba and Crime in Russia, the Turner reference doesn't support what it is being used to support. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, there was a mistake in URL, I have fixed it. This is the right page.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 19:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

World Rabies Day
Hi, Thanks for your corrections to the WRD articles. I have check with the event organization team in CDC and from the Alliance for Rabies Control and the event is planned for the 28th every year. 2007 was the first year it took place and an official date had not yet been chosen. Have a nice day, Mrhnm (talk) 11:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Robert Marsden Hope
Ease up Turbo!!. I'm removing the request for deletion you placed there. I'm in a different timezone to you obviously, and I stopped editing last night at 11.30pm - I do have to sleep and work and look after a family. I will finish the article tonight. I started with the infobox because it's a good way to write - by the time you source and fill in the relevant details, I find I've found most of the available information on the article. Not much on this guy, but I'll tag it as an Australian Law Biography stub or the like and those with more information can pad it out until I can get down to the Library. What he did do in Australia warrants an article on him due to the links to him that will no doubt be needed.Akitora (talk) 00:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Usually when I create an article, I make sure that I am providing at least enough information in the first pass so that the article can stand up to a notability inquiry. An infobox isn't really part of the article's content so it doesn't always establish notability.  This is important just in case you can't come back to the article for a few days, it prevents it from being deleted because notability wasn't established.  Even one paragraph with a couple of references can be enough.  You must have spent some time putting together the infobox and that time could have been better spent establishing notability.  The infobox can come later.  The world rarely waits for an editor to come back at some later date to establish notability.  Just some advice you didn't ask for.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 01:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers for the good advice! - it's sound and you are right. Sorry if I overreacted. Thanks also for pointing out the inuse and underconstruction templates - my new best friends.Akitora (talk) 09:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mufka. Thanks for your help on the article. Question for you - the use of "ibid." in references - is it done on Wikipedia?Akitora (talk) 22:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No, but you'll notice how I grouped your duplicate references. Look at the code and see how I used the  That way, the whole reference isn't duplicated.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

My username
I have already asked to get it changed! Please give me a chance--Wiki-page-protector (talk) 13:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It is no problem. I should of though before I decided on this username--Wiki-page-protector (talk) 14:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Málaga coach crash
Could you please take some time to read the article about the Málaga coach crash before automatically deciding it's non-notable? As I have said at Talk:April 19, there have been three road accidents in the United States with fewer casualties, yet Wikipedia covers all three in much more detail than this one. Am I seeing some sort of bias here? J I P | Talk 19:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Discussion at Talk:April 19. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

wikEd logo activation...
The protocols 'Control-F5' and 'Control-Refresh' did not help me activate the wikEd logo. The browser is the latest IE.   Thank you Mufka--Stonewhite 03:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars day
may help. Sceptre (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How so? -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Use of "May the Fourth be with you" is quite common for a Star Wars joke, as shown by the sources (inc. Bupa-sponsored run and BBC3 being totally lame). Sceptre (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, I'm aware of that. It always comes up around this time of year.  Every joker thinks he's the first to think of it.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for welcoming me!
Hi Mufka,

thanks for the warm welcome on my talk page :) also for the help in the IRC help forum.

I have a question: I'm not only a Beatles fan but also a Frank Zappa fan. On the german wikipedia pages there is allready a nice article about the Zappanale in Germany (the worlds only festival honoring and playing music of frank zappa): http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zappanale

I'm thinking about putting up an article of the zappanale in english too, but my english is not that good. But maybe I can try to find someone to help me with that.

first question; can I just translate the german article, or do I have to write it completly myself?

secondly, could you assist me a bit when adding that article?

thx in advance,

Guy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxign (talk • contribs) 19:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the best place for you to start is at Translation. From there you can see how the process works.  I haven't been involved with any translation so I can't help with the specifics.  Keep in mind, though, that not all articles that are in another language Wikipedia would meet notability requirements to be included in the English Wikipedia.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Year page formats - question
I've applied to extend PseudoBot to year pages. I notice that on, say, 1973, the first one I looked at, there's inconsistency in the handling of days with multiple births/deaths. Compare December 27 with December 30 on the births on that page, for instance. Obviously I'll make PseudoBot deal with either, but I wondered what the standard was and whether I ought to be fixing it (not with the bot, that'd be too much bureaucracy...) Pseudomonas(talk) 14:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There is currently no style guide for the year pages as far as I know but I think they are consistently different from the day pages. So, as it stands, you'll probably have to deal with some inconsistencies until a style guide is written.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Guideline
Hi - I notice WP:DOY has stalled again (no apparent progress in the last month). I think it may be time to ask Kingturtle to put up or shut up, and I don't have any idea what to do with Dulcem's "Western-focused" objection (he/she/it hasn't responded on the talk page since this comment, which seems to fundamentally be a snark). Is there anything I can do to help? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know how to move it forward. With such a low volume of comments and two objections, I don't know if it can go forward.  The guideline is followed and enforced by 99.99% of editors (whether they know it or not).  The formality of approval comes into play in the 00.01% of the cases where someone wants to argue.  Unfortunately, the community review process brings in folks like Dulcem who have never edited a date article and don't understand the maintenance necessary.  I find the process frustrating and I don't know what to do going forward.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I've poked Kingturtle and Dulcem. Let's see if this helps.  -- Rick Block (talk) 18:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You haven't commented at WT:DOY in a bit - what do you think about Kingturtle's slightly expanded list but with a recommended size limit? -- Rick Block (talk) 14:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been very busy, I'll try to comment by the end of the week. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 17:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kyle Brnes Article
My references are more then sufficent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sab 13ca (talk • contribs)

Talk:Kevin Jonas
I have no idea what edit you are requesting on that page. Could you explain? &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

December 10 and Thailand
Hey Mufka. I undid your undo on December 10 since it does check out Cheers --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 14:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The entry must link to its support. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Minor edits
Thanks. I'll keep that in mind. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you help me
I edited the page July 25, addng the recent Qantas flight 30 incedent, however it seems to have been deleted, can you tell me why many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyb12 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The event does not have long term global notability. Plane crashes and incidents with airplanes happen frequently enough that only those that occur under unusual circumstances and cause significant loss of life or widespread policy change can be considered notable enough for inclusion.  Have a look at the discussion on this topic here.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou, i will refer to that archive for any future answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyb12 (talk • contribs) 11:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Your edits to Kevin Jonas (singer)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a different title by copying its content and pasting it into. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is considered undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut and paste move repair holding pen.

Keith D (talk) 12:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Since it seemed reasonable that the page should be moved per WP:NAME, and since the other Jonas brothers were moved and merged, I was being bold and figuring that if it was screwed up, someone would fix it. And, alas, I was correct!  Just trying to do my part.  And out of respect for your fellow experienced editors, please don't template the regulars.  Thanks.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is reasonable to assume that regulars would use the move tab. —Centrx→talk &bull; 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * My understanding of WP:MOVE was that I could not use the move tab if the target exists and has a history. Is that help page incorrect?  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * No the help is correct and why you should request a move at WP:RM for an administrator to move the page. Keith D (talk) 22:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. I learn something new every day.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation - cswiki
I made usurpation for you. Make SUL and than login in. Have a nice day --Chmee2 (talk) 12:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Chronology
I must agree with you, as I see that you speak from experience. The project scope is wide enough, as more than 2000+ articles (at least) fall into its scope. Now, I wouldn't mind tagging, assessing and expanding this many articles, as it improves Wikipedia as a whole. But to co-ordinate the project myself, and without any help from other editors, will definately prove near impossible. A merge with WP:TIMELINE? Sounds possible, but the hard part is to get enough editors interested in the project itself. I have proposed the project on WP:COUNCIL/P, where it will hopefully recieve support. J.T Pearson (talk) 15:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's talk...
Can you explain to me why my contribution was deleted?

I'm new to this and would like to understand what I might have done wrong so I can better understand how I can constructively contribute in the future.

Regards, Ohio Golfer Ohio golfer (talk) 02:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Some BS for you
Thank you. I had to laugh after reading your header! --CalendarWatcher (talk) 22:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WP CHRON
Perhaps I'm a bit over-eager. I will refrain from tagging any more articles until consensus has been achieved. Thanks, Jor  dan  Contribs  13:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)