User talk:Ral315/Archive 25

Benoit's death
Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. I'm making a very serious comment to any Signpost editors that we should be careful about what we write about Benoir's death, and the issues surrounding it. I don't really appreciate you removing the comment as it was onpoint. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What argument? With whom am I arguing? I'm putting the comment back. I find it particularly inflammatory that you removed it. I realise that you're an editor, but I wasn't picking on anyone. I was making a comment on how we should be careful on why we are writing the story. - Ta bu shi da yu 11:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost Q&A
Hello Ral,

since I am traveling, I probably won't be able to answer your questions. Sorry & thanks for the election coverage; perhaps you can insert a note to that effect somewhere.--Eloquence* 01:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews writing competition
Seeing as Wikinews has just hit its "Andy Warhol" moment with the Benoit story, could you mention our proposed competition in the signpost? We're looking for people to take a look around and clue themselves up a bit about wikinews (eg article layout is completely different from 'pedia). Then make suggestions on how they could contribute so we can assess where to scale those contributions on our points system. And - of course - we need prize donors.

The initial page for the competition is at Wikinews:WN:CONTEST, and I've bugged Eloquence and jwales for prize contributions. I want to see a decent prize pot, and perhaps some mainstream media coverage while we're still in the spotlight. It is a great opportunity for us to attract contributors. --Brianmc 10:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Features & Admins
Please do not continue to move Administrators and Bots to the bottom. The current setup is preferred because the amount of space required for featured pictures forces too much scrolling between featured content and admins/bots. The current layout also usually allows all of administrators and bots, and part of featured content to be visible without scrolling at all. Ral315 » 18:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I tried to start a discussion about this earlier, but no one replied, so I was WP:BOLD. No one reverted before you either.  Having admins before featured stuff gives the impression that becoming an administrator is more newsworthy (and therefore more important) than getting content to featured status.  That is absolutely wrong.  If people really care who the new admins are (and why should they?) I think they can find it in them to scroll down.  Your argument doesn't make any sense - if the New York Times has to report a presidential election and a new art exhibit on their website, they're not going to bump the election news down just because the blurb about the art is shorter.  IMHO, the only real purpose the "admins" section serves is vanity, and that is entirely unacceptable.  Your sysop bit is not a trophy, despite those self-promoting little pedestaled puzzle pieces some of you elitists put on your user pages.  67.86.86.217 00:20, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Milestones on Signpost
Hello, I saw, you are very active at the Signpost. Can you tell me, what is the right procedure to add milestones to the Signpost? The current page is Wikipedia Signpost/2007-06-25/News and notes. But if I add a milestone there, it'll not be on the current page any more in short time. Where to place milestones? Well, the milestone, I want to add is 10,000 articles on Low Saxon Wikipedia (nds) with nds:Erskine Caldwell. Thanks --:Slomox:: &gt;&lt; 17:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll have the story to you in about 20
my 'real work' had a meltdown (server crash) and we've all be in a panic. --Thespian 17:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * How do I submit things? it's currently in my sandbox. It needs some formatting changes, but I think it's done. I just don't know what to do with it ;-) --Thespian 19:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

More questions Are you going to add the sidebar to the story? Right now is says 'by Thespian and Sr13', but all I see is stuff that I wrote and you edited, not the stuff he was going to do. Is that getting added later? --Thespian 06:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'm used to seeing that as "by X, with contributions from Y" when Y hasn't actually written anything. I guess it's just because he didn't actually do any of the work on the writing people see there, it seems odd to me. I have no problems sharing bylines when stories are merged (if I did, I'd never be able to work on Wikipedia!), but if he did work but none of its appearing in the article, it seems odd to imply that his work is there. --Thespian 06:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

RFB
Supported / added a question in my support. Reformat as you will, and good luck. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 08:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

RfB question
I've asked an optional question on your RfB, the same as I have asked of all current RfB candidates. Waltontalk 14:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

RE:Image map on WP:POST
This should do the trick: 

I've already made the change, so no need to worry. :-) —  «  A NIMUM   »  20:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Your RfB
Apologies. Vote withdrawn. G1ggy (t 06:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Features and admins
Since E is unavailable this week, I decided to do the f and a section. I'm a bit confused on the bots part, so could you help me on that? The draft is here. Good luck on your RfB, by the way. Thanks; Sr13 08:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

TROLL
I'm horribly busy to-night, so Newyorkbrad has agreed to do this week's ROLL. David Mestel(Talk) 15:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Version reviewing.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Version reviewing.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:New protection interface.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:New protection interface.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:WikimediaMosaic20061106.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:WikimediaMosaic20061106.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:ProtectionError.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:ProtectionError.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Your soon-to-be closed RFB
Hi Ral, I am here to wish you the best of luck in the closure of your current RFB. If you succeed, I'm sure you will make a great crat. Sincerely, -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 03:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ahh... it seems it has been extended. All the best, all the same. -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 03:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks in part to your support, I am Wikipedia's newest bureaucrat. I will do my best to live up to your confidence and kind words. Andre (talk) 09:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC) P.S. Good luck on your own RfB. Don't be discouraged if you don't make it this time -- it took me 3 :)


 * Timestamp. Ral315 » 09:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User page edit buttons
Im just wondering how you enable edit features for each section on your user page. I would like to do the same for my userpage, but I don't know how. Thanks - • The Giant Puffin •  19:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Rambutan
It's certainly not something that, if I just saw on its own and out of context, I would block for. But given that this user has had serial problems with the 3RR on Doctor Who articles, violating it on multiple articles in a short period, and, at one point, managing something ridiculous like 8 reverts in two hours, I do feel like the 3RR should be applied with all possible strictness. Phil Sandifer 12:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost In the news section
Hi there, I've noticed that the "In the News" section that used to be in the Signpost has disappeared in recent editions. Is this because of a lack of interest in that kind of story, or is this because of a lack of editors? I wouldn't mind volunteering to help write that section once a week. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 14:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've written up an article for the coming edition: User:Enochlau/In the news. I've linked to it from Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom - is that all I need to do to have it included? Thanks! enochlau (talk) 02:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

RFB
Ral - I've closed your request for bureaucratship as unsuccessful. As you know, I'm very sorry to do it - I would very much like to have seen you promoted. Raul654 01:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's unfortunate. Ral, you're a great editor, and an excellent admin.  Best wishes, and best of luck next time!  Giggy  UCP 01:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I would have liked to see that too. You're a good editor, a good admin, and would have been a good bureaucrat, as well. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 01:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Good Luck in the future. I'm sorry your RFB did not pass. Politics rule 01:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have another concern which I am unwilling to bring up publicly on actual RFB. Your user name is too similar ro Raul654 (another Bureaucrate). I would prefer to see a name change before adding support (Hence I did not vote). SYSS Mouse 21:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, we already have that taken care of. See user:Raul315 Raul654 21:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What about User:Ral654 :p SYSS Mouse 15:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Ralbot
Your bot seems to have stopped in the middle of the Js some 20 minutes ago - could you give it a kick start? --ST47 Talk 20:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ralbot
Your bot's resending the Signpost for this week. I've blocked it. --Maxim 19:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ral, you've sent from the A's up, and when I've blocked it, everything from A is double sent. Should it be all mass-reverted (I've already flagged myself, so if you give the green light, I'll do it). Also, I've started a thread on WP:AN/I, as it is usually the place to go to notify that a bot has malfunctioned. Maxim 19:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ral: I got a username change form (E to M), so I've got it twice. I thought KOS got it twice, so then I thought that the bot had started making a mess. But I'm sorry for this, and you're right, the bot's working fine. It's me that got a username change... Sorry, again. `Maxim 19:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Ralbot
Your bot just sent me the Signpost of 16 July. He's three days late!  Sala Skan  20:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost reviews
Just caught the 16th's Signpost, and I was pleasantly surprised to find a book review. If you need/want any additional review work (volunteer of course) in the future, I'm your man. I've worked as a performing, film and literary arts critic for several years now with various local publications. The opportunity to write for/from a Wikipedian's perspective is compelling to me. I can almost certainly work on short notice if necessary, as I'm online just about every day and have ready access to a wide selection of books (Powell's rocks!) Cheers, VanTucky  (talk) 22:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Citizendium and the Signpost
I don't know if you or Michael is publishing this week, but I wanted to run this by you: I thought it might be useful if Mike Johnson (Citizendium Constable and a blogger on open.wikiblogplanet) wrote up a short piece to run alongside my report, describing the current plans and changes happening at Citizendium. I pitched it to him (here), but he's worried about whether it might too many feathers. Thoughts or editorial dictates?--ragesoss 22:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Sidebar
I know you really wanted to cover the story, but Thespian has already gathered information and (presumably) written a story by now. I have school tomorrow, so if you can add to the sidebar (and I know you can), feel free to credit yourself.

Possible story for Signpost - not sure where it should go
The 24 July 2007 edition of Engines of our Ingenuity &mdash; "No 2253: The Commons Revisited" &mdash; comments on Wikipedia: Now we have a wholly new commons that no one anticipated back then. The Internet is evolving its own code of co-ownership, even as we watch the push-pull between private and common interests.

Wikipedia leaves everyone gasping at its audacity....The idea that our combined common knowledge can create a vast, and accurate, encyclopedia of all knowledge violates every fiber of our belief system.... I might be worth a mention in next week's Signpost. (Read the article for more). Very interesting description of Wikipedia. &mdash; User: (talk) 02:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

fyi
I think I'm going to see if I can contact the people doing the Wikipedia Plays and do a 'soft' article on the troupe/theatre (akin to this one which I did for a Toronto theatre before an opening of theirs) before I go down there and review the plays for the Signpost for the 6th. If I can arrange that, I'd like to run them in consecutive weeks; the 'Motivation' article one week and the 'Actualization' article the next. Judging from previous issues with theatre groups, they should be happy for the exposure, and it'll let us get 2 articles out of it. Just running that by you. --Thespian 22:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

RalBot
Hi Ral. I saw on user:Ralbot that you were interested in programming a code specifically for RalBot and the Signpost. If you would like I could program something and give it to use as a .exe file. Let me know. ~  Wi ki  her mit  00:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania
Hope to hear from you. Witty Lama 06:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey there, Do you plan to talk about how Wikimania is kicking off next week? It starts on the 3rd (with hacking days etc. before that) so it falls within the scope of this upcoming edition. We over a Wikipedia Weekly are going to Taiwan to cover the event in twice daily shows and were wondering if we could get a mention in the Signpost pointing to our plans? The participants will be Users: Fuzheado (Andrew Lih), Tawker, DaveyDweeb, MessedRocker and myself Witty Lama. We'll also be having interviews with known and not so known wikipedians, daily "wrap-ups", vox pops, and descussions on some of the presentations. We'll also be running "the lounge" for people at the conference to drop in, chat and participate in some interactive training sesssions we hope to run.

Signpost not delivered yet
Hi Ral,

I'm on the spamlist for the signpost, but the July 30th edition doesn't seem to be out yet on my talk page...if you have time please clarify. Takk! --H| H irohisat  Talk 23:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost - July 30
Hey Ral, just as a heads up (as far as I know), the July 30 edition of the signpost wasn't delivered to the spamlist. What's up? Giggy Talk 04:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That's ok it was delievered late. as long as I can read it, I'm happy. Politics rule 00:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * For some reason, two copies were delivered to me. — Bob • (talk) • 01:10, August 4, 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay, sorry 'bout that. Thanks for fixing it. — Bob • (talk) • 03:15, August 4, 2007 (UTC)

Backup Signpost Bot
I questioned at WT:POST what happened to the bot. In the future, should my bot be designated as the backup bot, which would run if the signpost isn't delivered by the day after it's published? -- (Review Me) R Parlate Contribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 01:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know how it works. It's the same way I deliver newsletters. However, you could make it easier by sending me the file. I don't like giving out my e-mail because of spammers (bot and people), so I'm sending you a blank e-mail that will have it. Thanks, -- (Review Me) R Parlate Contribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 03:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
''Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315''
 * It's alright. Thanks for the reason anyway. Onnaghar tl 14:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I made a change. (possibly bold)
You had linked 'from the editor' on all pages to Michael's coverage of the chapters issue (resumably because you're tired, at least partly my fault). Since that's not a 'from the editor', but instead him covering the subject, I went through and corrected it on each page so that people wouldn't follow it get something 'From the editor' and assume he was soapboxing instead of reporting. Please undo if I missed something. --Thespian 08:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * True, but if I'd been wrong, it would have been bold ;-) --Thespian 07:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost Question
Hey, Ral. I'm interested in helping out in any way possible with the Signpost, perhaps even writing a bit for it, and figured you'd be the person to ask. The newsroom was a bit overwhelming, so I'm not sure where to start. Cheers,  A r k y  ¡Hablar! 01:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Editing the signpost
Hi, Ral, I have quite a few interesting stories for the signpost, what can I do?Holmes.sherlock 13:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

CC 3.0
Thanks for writing this story :) I am always impressed by the impartiality of Signpost stories. cheers, pfctdayelise (talk) 15:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost Question
(revived from archives)
 * Hey, Ral. I'm interested in helping out in any way possible with the Signpost, perhaps even writing a bit for it, and figured you'd be the person to ask. The newsroom was a bit overwhelming, so I'm not sure where to start. Cheers,  A r k y  ¡Hablar! 21:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:BJAODN
That's a reasonable reaction. Since the primary area where neutrality comes into question is the second half of the article, where I discussed the two sides of the debate, I think that could be scrapped and rewritten from scratch. I'd still like to be credited as a co-author or supporting contributor to the article. Shalom Hello 16:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If whoever is writing this article now wishes to ask me questions... I am available to explain my intention, so as not to have words put in my mouth, or misconceptions created. Particularly since this case is going before arbcom.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 00:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In response to your question on my talk page:
 * I feel there has been a general coarsening of intra-admin relations, with admins much more willing to reverse each other without discussion than when I first joined. The Arbitration Committee has spoken out, in cases and in noticeboard comments, about the need to respect each other and to not reverse without appropriate discussion (unless it is an emergency of course).  But the Arbitration Committee lacks jurisdiction to jump into a non-emergency situation and start passing out yellow and red cards.  I basically ignored the BJAODN situation until I saw Radiant suggest on the noticeboard that a case for wheel warring might be filed.  After Isotope23 concurred, I decided to file the case.  I don't want to see drastic action such as permanent desysopping, but I would like to see a forceful restatement of the principle that admins should not reverse each other on a non-emergency basis without appropriate discussion.  The only way the Committee can have the opportunity to make such a statement is through a case filed by someone else.  So, that's what I did.
 * This is the discussion I was thinking of. Thatcher131 13:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I have laid out a timeline in my evidence and a series of proposed findings of fact (the first edits to the workshop page) that would give the Committee the opportunity to find either that Alkivar and Gerorgewilliamherbert's actions were appropriate or inappropriate. Although I believe admin reversals without discussion are bad for the project, there are good points to be made the Alkivar's deletion was a mistake, and I honestly don't have an opinion on who was more or less wrong in this situation.  So I laid out arguments on both sides.  I will not be offering any proposed remedies.
 * I agree that the term "wheel-war" does not fit this situation because there was only one deletion and one reversal, but admin reversals without discussion is a bad habit to get into. The comments on the noticeboard and workshop that Alivar was right because of GFDL issues or that Georgewilliamherbert was right because the last attempted deletion was controversial miss the point entirely. Every admin who reverses someone else's action, whether for the first or the fifth time, thinks he is "right." Since neither the deletion nor the undeletion was an emergency, taking the time to discuss the matter with the admin you disagree with, and/or with the community as a whole, is more important than being "right."  Thatcher131 13:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Joining the Signpost
I may not have looked hard enough, but I haven't seen any way to join the staff of the Signpost. If there is capacity available, I would be interested in joining. I have experience in journalism, and I have occasionally contributed to Wikinews. I'd love to be a freelancer, and I can help out whenever needed. Let me know how I can help. Sobar 02:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

AWB Quick help
Hi there, I noticed you used AWB on a page that i use. I'm trying to use it to fix some disambig problems in a particularly large category (9570 pages at last count). I have read the user's guide and i'm a bit stumped. Would you mind if i asked you a question? Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 06:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost
Hey! I'm a big fan of the Signpost, and would love to know if I can help out in any way. I'm an ex-journalism/communication studies major (switched to poly sci), but I've got a working understanding of news style. Do we write in AP style, or anything in particular? Just curious. Let me know how I can help out!

Also, I might give your WikiBiography contest a shot. Hope that's okay! GlassCobra 19:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

StatusBot
About a week ago, I added the StatusBot category to a few userpages of members of BAG, for the purpose of adding the ustatus template to the list on WP:BAG. Some users have disagreed with this, so I am going through the user talk pages of people I added the category to. Would you mind keeping the category, or would you prefer it to be removed? If you want it removed, you may either delete your subpage of User:StatusBot/Status, in this case, User:StatusBot/Status/Ral315, and remove the category from your userpage. This will hide the ustatus template and stop it being re-activated. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 01:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost Bot
Hi Ral315. I'd be willing to continue the "cross wiki" delivery of the signpost if you'd like. I'd have to go around to each wiki, but that wouldn't be much of a problem with a bot. Tell me what you think. ~  Wi ki  her mit  02:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)