User talk:Wesley Wolf/Archive 2

=October 2011= No content.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk 

=November 2011=

San Marino removal from Eurovision Song Contest 2012 article
Hi, Wesley Mouse. Your right. I forgot those informations. Thank you for your correction. :) Redpower94 (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Moldova in JESC 2012
Heya. Aren't blog posts considered an unappropriate source per WP:BLOGS? Same actually applies to Russia's confirmation. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 06:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You'll find I never added the blog spot for Moldova in JESC 2012. I updated the article with details on Italy and San Marino using sources.  The part on Moldova was already there, without any write-up about it, and I just tidied it up by including a short bit of text.  ESCKaz is a reliable source, correct?  Wesley Mouse (talk) 08:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * User Tranqilian added the original link for Moldova (as shown here). Wesley Mouse (talk) 08:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is from Andy's live blog from Yerevan, not from the main site. And indeed he did, I'm sorry. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 08:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The same applies for Russia too. A different editor added Russia at the time they created the article.  So it may be worth checking with them first about Russia's inclusion, before jumping ahead and removing it.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 09:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't get what you mean. If you can find an article in a reliable website about Russia's confirmation (I couldn't), please go ahead and post it. Anything else may fail WP:V. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 09:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What I mean is, whoever created the JESC2012 article first, also added details and the link for Russia. The website that was used to source Russia, is in fact from Russian TV website.  And the moderator (or member of staff at the broadcaster) confirmed in the link that Russia would start preparations for JESC2012 in February.  Now surely a website and member of staff from Russian broadcaster would be sufficient at this early stage.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 09:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is still a forum posting, however, and no other site mentioned Russia's confirmation, which is a bit curious per WP:BLOGS ("if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else will probably have done so.") Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 09:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just checked, and yet again, it was Tranquilian who added the link for Russia (as shown on this diff) on 11 October 2011. Other editors knew it was there, and appear to have accepted the link as reliable for Wiki purposes.  Especially when User:AxG created the map on 17 October 2011 and included Russia that that time.  If anything AxG would have queried the Russia link at that time before he created the map?  I'm pretty sure he checks reliability of links being used before he creates a map file. Wesley Mouse (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Heh, creating and editing a map file is no big deal... I don't know if AxG checked the quality of the sources before creating the map. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 09:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Whoa, please don't be misquoting me. I never said that creating/editing the map was a big deal. I merely said that if the Russia link was dubious, then it would have been noted at the time the map was created - especially when that was done by a long-term member of the wikiproject. Also, you have made various alteration after the inclusion of Russia. Why has it taken until now (over a month later) to query the links reliability status? Quite a reasonable question! Wesley Mouse (talk) 09:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, after I saw that link claiming Moldova's withdrawal, I checked the quality of all references in the JESC 2012 article... I didn't pay any attention before. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 09:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's understandable enough then. I check the dubious sources that stand out like a sore thumb - anything else I randomly check as and when.  Or if someone questions a link; then I do an extensive search into questionable links, and also a lengthy search on google to find anything more substantial to verify it.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 09:51, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more! This is what I'm doing these days by the way, improving Greek football stubs, you cannot imagine how much crap there is out there! Cheers. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 09:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm currently working hard on the latest Liechtenstein mystery. There are several sources published by the EBU that has Liechtenstein listed as an active member, and also has Andorra still listed as an active member.  The bizarre twist is that we know Andorra have quit the EBU - yet we don't know much more as to whether Liechtenstein have been approved or not.  But my extensive research into this is slowly unravelling the mystery in its entirety.  I hope to solve this investigation in a few days or so.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 10:03, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha, have fun. Indeed I've heard that Liechtenstein have at last founded a broadcaster and Andorra have withdrawn, but no details. I will be waiting for the outcome of your research. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 10:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I see, I may not have checked the sources on the JESC 2012 article, I try to leave it to others for that. However I do keep a closer eye on ESC sources, when creating and editing the maps. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sincere apologies AxG for bringing your name up in this little discussion - I hope yo accept my forgiveness. I don't mind being a little "watchdog" on articles, and help out checking for verifiability, especially with JESC2012, if you like?  Wesley Mouse (talk) 19:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Apparently, the source about Moldova falls under WP:NEWSBLOG (which I only noticed a few minutes ago), so it is considered acceptable. The Russian one, however, is not. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 21:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Oh wow, I'm speechless. Thank you ever so much.  I only do what I feel should be done though, and work cooperatively and assist where necessary, or investigate areas that need investigating.  Afterall, a good article can only be achieved with good team work.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 18:50, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

=December 2011=

Re:Talk page assistance
MiszaBot III has been working fine for me, but has not for you since September. The only thing I can suggest is try and start the 'User:MiszaBot/config' from scratch?

As for the Olympics countdown thing? I copied that from WikiProject Olympics/countdown, but as you can see, I have made it 2 on top and on bottom (and also slightly out of date:) ) --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:22, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you AxG for the assistance. I've tried out the Misza config, so fingers-crossed it works now.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 15:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Twinkle
Have a look at this Twinkle, a very useful app, with links to: Warning templates, Welcome templates, reporting Users to admins, requesting page deletions, page protection. Have a read, it certainly is great to have! :) --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 16:46, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link AxG. I had viewed the page via the link provided on CT Cooper's page, but found the whole page confusing.  Nothing on the page helped to explain things in simple terms.  Somewhere on the page talks about a gadget, and there's a screenshot, which would make me assume the gadget is a downloaded app.  If that is so, there is no link (that I can see) to download the twinkle app.  It could be a case of the page being simplified better, to encourage others to use Twinkle - especially if it is a tool worth having.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 17:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No downloading necessary, simply go to 'My preferences' then click 'Gadgets', then under 'Browsing' simply tick where it says 'Twinkle', then 'Save' at the bottom of the page. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 18:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Eurovision 2012 map
OK here is my simple guide:
 * 1. Do you have Inkscape? If not download it from here.
 * 2. Install it on your computer.
 * 3. Find the Image you want to edit (E.g. File:ESC_2012_Map.svg)
 * 4. Click the image so the background is all white, like this.
 * 5. Right click the image and choose 'Save Page As...' (This may be different depending on browser) and then 'Save'
 * 6. Open the Image in Inkscape.
 * 7. And simply click a country and change the colour (their should be a colour chart at the bottom so press F7 on the colour you want the country to change to).
 * 8. Save it (obviously :D)
 * 9. Upload it to commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ESC_2012_Map.svg - Go to the near bottom, underneath 'File history' and click 'Upload a new version of this file'.
 * 10. Locate the file by clicking 'Browse' and then click 'Upload file'.

Done! If you need any more help, please ask:) --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 19:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you ever so much. The instructions you have supplied seem simple enough.  I will give it a try the next time the map needs an adjustment.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 21:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I've just had a little tester with the Inkscape software, and saved the map on my computer. However, the file size has increased to 423kb, and not 414kb which the previous maps seem to be saved as.  How do I make the file size smaller?  Wesley Mouse (talk) 21:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not too sure, mine says its 410 KB (Size) and 412 KB (Size on disk). A common mistake that some people make is they create a new layer of the area and put it on top with the new colour, when the old is underneath. Could you upload your version to File:ESC_2012_Map.svg then revert it, so I can look at it? --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 23:08, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've just this minute uploaded my version as per request. Wesley Mouse (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok I've had a look, it's that old layers thing. Talk about what you did from start to finish. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 23:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I followed your instructions as shown above. Saved the original file, and then selected the purple colour (from the key codes at the bottom of the image itself). Painted Italy in purple on the map. Then selected the yellow colour, and painted Monaco as yellow. Saved the file. When I checked the file size increased. I didn't touch anything to do with layers, only changed the colours. Wesley Mouse (talk) 00:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Define 'painted'. Did you select Italy first, and when you did, did it have a broken edged square around it with arrows at all corners and middle, then changed it? --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 00:16, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I went to the colour first (the part that has the 4 colours being used for the map). Selected purple using the pipette thing, and then I selected the bucket symbol, and clicked on Italy to change it all purple.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 00:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Never use that bucket again! :D. 1 Click the country first, then select the pipette, then select the colour. The bucket seem to add a new layer which is not needed. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 00:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Ooohhhhhh bad, bad bucket!!! Never knew a bucket added layers without me knowing. Well that's that bucket well and truly kicked haha.  I'll try again without the bucket.  Fingers-crossed.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 00:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Yay it worked!!! Thanks AxG, you are a very good teacher! Wesley Mouse (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! Now upload it:) --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 00:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded it, and the file size is the same - phew!!! I feel really proud of myself now learning something new. Wesley Mouse (talk) 00:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The maps were originally 570 KB, however a user had reduced the size to what we have now, I don't know how they did it, but It's nothing to worry about, unless you want redo all 60+ maps :D --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 19:48, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Now there's a challenge and a half. I don't mind taking on the mammoth challenge though, if that is what is required.  Is a more uniformed look necessary for the WikiProject, to keep things looking consistent throughout?  Wesley Mouse (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The looks of the maps are the same, it's just the internal stuff that's been simplified. Like I said nothing to worry about, the new maps will use the smaller file size. --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 20:45, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's OK then. I'll leave the older maps as they are, unless I spot any PNG formats, then I'll convert them into SVG's.  It was only that JESC2012 map that I noticed being in PNG that triggered me into asking about maps in general.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 20:48, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Something strange is going on
Well that is strange, from your contributions I have the following:
 * 22:08, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:AxG
 * 22:05, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2011
 * 21:54, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012
 * 21:46, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2012
 * 21:40, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012
 * 19:29, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012‎
 * 16:21, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) File talk:ESC 2012 Map.svg
 * 21:36, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012

Would these be right? I probably am going to be little help here, I have no idea? --  [[ axg  ◉  talk   ]] 23:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Those contributions are correct yes. However, "22:05, 12 December 2011 (diff | hist) Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2011" wasn't showing as changed at first.  An IP address altered the results table on Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2011, to which I reverted that edit on AGF, giving an explanation.  Yet my reversion wasn't showing on the article; until now.  I wonder if there is some technical delay between an editor saving their edits, and it showing up on the article(s) for everyone, including the editor!?  Wesley Mouse (talk) 23:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Poland withdrawal saga at Eurovision Song Contest 2012
Hi Wesley. I understand where you are coming from with the Poland issue for Eurovision 2012, but I feel that while there were a number of conflicting articles circulating, about Facebook posts and the like, I feel that there has been a conclusion to the discussion, with Poland finally withdrawing. Many times when news sites such as ESCToday and Oikotimes source themselves they are normally referring to information they have received. It was also discussed among members of the Eurovision WikiProject about which news sites were seen as reliable/unreliable for different reasons, you can see the results here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision/Archive 4. It clearly shows that there was a large consensus that ESCToday was a reliable source, so I believe that news reported by them to be factual. While news about Poland may change, as it did with Slovakia last year, I feel for the moment at least we can say that Poland has decided not to take part in next year's contest. Also anything can change, so I wouldn't think of one decision being final: the article can always change based on new information and new sources. Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually agree with the above editor. While Oikotimes may be a questionable source, ESCToday sure is a reliable one. Such an article about Poland's withdrawal would be more than sufficient for inclusion in a Junior Eurovision article. Why not in the senior one too? Also BTW, thanks for that link summarizing consensus for various Eurovision-related websites. I wonder what's the case with ESCDaily, that's not in the list. Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 20:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand what is being said, but something just doesn't add up right with all the articles. It is like something jumping out from all the articles that others may be missing or not noticed.  Both ESCToday and Oikotimes mention in their respective articles that "they" were the first to be told by TVP about the withdrawal.  This I find really bizarre.  How can they both have the same exclusive, at the same time?  One of them has to have been told first, and the other has copied the information and claiming it to be theirs - or they are both publishing identical articles on the same thing.  The other strange things is another Polish website (wirtualnemedia.pl) has publish the EXACT same wording from ESCToday's and yet THEY state they are the first to have been told by bosses at TVP.  Now surely 3 separate companies all with no connections to each other, can be the original source of the same exclusive from TVP.  And we're forgetting the other factor.  2 of the 3 websites that I've mentioned quoted TVP as saying "they will give an official announcement on TVP.PL website".  Where is that announcement?  It isn't there, as TVP haven't published it yet.  TVP's official Facebook page even state themselves that they haven't spoken to ANY media or Eurovision-related websites about participation.  If TVP are correct, then ESCToday; Oikotimes, and wirtualnemedia.pl have printed articles based on pure propaganda from rumours flying the rounds.  That was why, I suggested it best to leave Poland's information as unknown, until something appears on TVP.pl (as the broadcaster said would happen) or the EBU confirm the truth... which they will no more on this than ANY ESC-related site.  I do find ESCToday as reliable with everything they print; but something on this occasion is niggling away at me, due to all the conflicting information of what TVP have "suppose" to have said to media sites, while TVP themselves deny saying anything to anyone.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to these articles: and, neither ESCToday or Oikotimes mention "exclusive" at all.


 * Sorry, but I'm just not convinced; as much as I trust the sites - something still doesn't add up 100% accurate enough. Both sites did use the words "exclusive" within hours of their articles being published.  Don't know why they are not showing on them now - but I do remember "exclusive" being used on them both.  I'll resign from the Poland debate for now, and draw a line under it.  In a few days the EBU will paint the official picture; and then we'll know 99.9% for certain what happens either way.  Wesley Mouse (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think ESCToday would spoil their reputation by spreading false "propaganda" reports. Also, as Sims2aholic8 wrote (at his unsigned comment above), neither of those two reliable sources claimed "exclusive" over their latest articles, and no article mentioned any pending official announcement on the broadcaster's website. So, I believe the case is clear; unless you doupt ESCToday's reliability, I believe the Polish withdrawal should be listed. Especially since I don't think the EBU makes official announcements about returning/withdrawing countries (at least, that's the case with JESC). Kosm1fent Won't you talk to me? 21:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year
A Very Happy New Year to all my wiki-friends who know me. I hope 2012 will bring you joy times. Regards - Wesley Mouse (talk) 13:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)