User:Fvw/TalkArchive/3

This page has been archived, please do not edit it. New talk and comments on this talk go on my talk page.

Vfd-ing

Sorry, Fvw, I was just about to add Elbert bill when there was a knock on my office door and I had a long talk. My visitor has just left now. Hold on a few seconds! -- Hoary 09:39, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

URLs

Thanks for the tip! Another case of RTFM, I'm afraid ;) Wyss 14:50, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Redirects to User: space

Actually, you don't need to bother with the extra work of tagging each leftover redirect (after you do the moves) with the "Main namespace cleanup" stuff - that's just making more work for you. If you do the moves for sections of the list, I'll follow behind and do the redirect deletes (and link fixes, as needed).

Would you like to try this on the subpages part of the list (most of which, as you can see from the copious red, I have already nailed)? Just start from the first entry, and work down the list, moving any that need to be moved (i.e. have any history, above and beyond switching redirect targets around). I was originally just skipping around in that section, trying to find big blocks of ones with no history I could delete, but now I've switched to working from the start and deleting the ones with no history, leaving those with for you. (If you get to one with no history that's still there, that's as far as I've gotten.) Noel (talk) 16:00, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, your call on adding the tags; I was just trying to say you some work! (I carefully always check to make sure things are "ready to roll" before I delete anything.) However, if you find it useful, to keep track of where you are, it's your call! I'm currently distracted with User:Nickj/Redirects, but I haven't forgotten about these redirects! I'll go do a few now, as a matter of fact. Noel (talk) 19:23, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Steve Davis (Comedian)

Okay, restored. The author blanked it though, which is grounds for a speedy delete, I think. Dunc|☺ 23:53, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

zippo tricks

to answer yur question about what is it with you people and zippos? is this: we happen to come from lightertricks.com itself and we thought it would be nice to add information on zippo tricking to what wikipedia has on zippo tricking.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero

As spanish i feel bad because the article of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero you restored, it shows the president as a far leftist dagerous political, and psoe as a leninist party. I would thank you look at the history of the article and see all this false data was introduced by only one user: 138.100.17.69 with crealy political intentions. At least i would like to see the neutral articles, many of the things said there are just untrue, you only have to look at the history of the article and the articles about zapatero in other languages. Please, dont restore articles that infame.

is not only a matter or disagree or not, i dont mind that people can tell here what they want, but something different is changing the oryginal article and saying dirty things about someone just because you dont like he is in office. Is like i sayed you adore hitler and stalin... anyway who knows.

Duck Fancy

Why sir do you not like Boners Dias? You make friend cry tears like duck. And he likes ducks! But not swans.

Culture of Madagascar

Nice comment in db-template :). Thue | talk 15:59, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

UK city links

Heya, I see you've removed the spam link from Oxford. Could you use your shiny admin powers to do the same for all the other cities the link's been added to? It was on my todo list, but since you've shown an interest and have to click less to do it I was hoping to get you to do it for me... Incidentally, congrats on the adminship! --fvw* 16:59, 2004 Dec 15 (UTC)

Hi Fvw, sorry I didn't catch your note earlier. In fact, if I had reverted Oxford, I must have already been half way through reverting the anon users contributions of commercial external links. In fact I did it the non-admin way since (for some reason that escapes me now), I wanted to be gentle on the new user and provide a reason for the reverts. Anyhow, should all be tidy now. -- 22:29, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Great, thanks! And not biting the newbie was a very kind, even if the necessity was debatable. --fvw* 16:48, 2004 Dec 16 (UTC)

212.127.230.159

what are you exactly doing. You think these studies make any sense ? Don't do that again !!!

External links vs External link

Thank you for clearing this up. I understand. It's just that I've seen so many people changing "links" to "link" whenever there's just one link to be listed that I thought perhaps that one was the standard.

Carry on. – Kaonashi 02:04, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

VfD

Thanks for the reminder and for correcting my mistakes! --Viriditas | Talk 10:55, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

revised fafblog entry okay?

I'm not sure what qualifies as sufficiently not judgmental, fandom, and relevant to be kept. Please leave a detailed comment if you think further adjustments need to be made, the last instruction was a bit cryptic for a newbie.

I've advised the owner and other members of the fafblog community about the entry, so hopefully the entry will be further revised to reflect their thoughts.

My beef with the article is in the first place with its subject's notability. Even if you wrote the perfect article on it, I would still contend it was not encyclopaedic. --fvw* 14:20, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

Thanks for the link

I didn't mind at all. Good addition. Thanks. :) --J-Star 14:35, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

URLs

Thanks for the tip! Another case of RTFM, I'm afraid ;) Wyss 14:52, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

re: fafblog

I wasn't aware of the low regard wikipedia holds blogs. I am bitter that I wasn't told this immediately and had expended considerable extra effort to polish and research the final article. For the future, please tell people your intentions more clearly, so they don't waste time and effort.

I'm sorry the misunderstanding caused you to expend effort on an article likely to get deleted, however I think my assessment of "vanity" on the blog page should have made clear that it was not an appropriate subject. See the entry for vanity in The VfD glossary for more info. Also note that nor I nor wikipedia as a whole have anything against blogs, but the notability rules apply to them just as they do to anything else. --fvw* 22:46, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hey, thanks for the barnstar - Admin, barnstar and a featured picture - this has to be the best week ever ;-)   -- Solipsist 22:53, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi again

Thanks for your help, i still need practice with the sandbox (i apologise for future mistakes if any). This is the first time I have edited a public page on the English Wiki. If you see any pages that need proofreading or translation from French or Italian, please let me know.

Ciao from Italy

--Wikipedius 21:12, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No problem, always nice to have some fresh blood. Don't worry too much about making mistakes, there's always people around to fix them. --fvw* 21:14, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)

test3

I choose the number a bit by feeling according to the kind of vandalism and its persistence. If someone just adds an Image:Example.jpg, that's definitely just a test. If someone add "%Classmate% is gay", that's more like a 2, and if that one is done again after being removed before I may go directly to 3. Maybe I am sometimes a bit fast to go to the higher levels, but especially if its a vandal rush hour I prefer to get the RC manageable than to make sure no potential contributor is scared away. But I am quite sure other Admins have their own way how to treat the vandals. andy 21:24, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sysop nomination

I would like to nominate you to be a Wikipedia administrator—Trevor Caira 02:04, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That's very kind of you, and is always nice to hear. However I've been nominated less than a month ago (and there was no consensus (yes, I was shocked too)); Current practice is not to have a nomination of someone more than once a month, so I think it's better to wait until the beginning of next year. If you still feel the same way at that time, I'd be very grateful. For the time being I'll just tolerate having to make a few extra clicks per vandalism, it's not that big a deal. Thanks again for the compliment though, it does make it all worth it. --fvw* 02:07, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

I'll certainly support you next time around.-gadfium (talk) 08:04, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sandbox and libeling

First, it's a sandbox. Second, look at the history because you start accusing (if you were refering to the poem of course). Other than that, have a nice day. __earth 02:12, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

There are still rules in the sandbox though. Misattribution and libel are not allowed anywhere. I don't know who's creative mind the poem sprung from, I merely checked to see who most recently added it. And have a nice day yourself too. --fvw* 02:16, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Pay Attention to Footnotes/Edit Summaries

There is a reason for the edit summary page. You just edited my text dump into The Beekeeper as "nonsense" when a quick glance at my edit summary would have clarified that I had dumped research text into the article temporarily and that the complete article would be readied in five minutes (as it is now.) Very frustrating. Pacian 03:37, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Please use preview for works in progress, or if that isn't possible, create new pages as subpages of your user page, and move them to the main namespace when done. For large and existing pages using {{inuse}} can be used, but use sparingly. --fvw* 03:40, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Cleanup Paul Phillips Disambiguation...

...in what way?

A few things went wrong in your disambiguation.

• • First of all, you should never move pages by copy and pasting, as this loses the page's edit history. The original content of Paul Phillips has to be reverted, then that page should be moved the the appropriate new location. (moving requires a user account. Registering one just takes a few seconds, I can recommend it. You get your own user page and watchlist, and the ability to move pages.)
  • The disambiguation page should be made at Paul Phillips, once the original article has been moved away.
  • The names shouldn't be disambiguated with numbers. Ideally, you should use middle names or full names if either of them has any, and if that doesn't work, put the occupation or what that person is notable for after the name in parenthesis, i.e. Paul Philips (guitarist) and Paul Philips (poker player).
  • For consistency, the format of the disambiguation page should be something like that of Roger Taylor (or any of the many other dab pages). Also, remember to put a {{disambig}} tag at the bottom of the page.

Let me know if you need any help. Oh, by the way: You can sign messages on talk pages by typing ~~~~ so people know who said it without having to dive into edit histories. --fvw* 05:02, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Software problems?

Hi Fvw,

I've noticed in a few of your edits that characters such as - and ? get replaced by ?. For example, see [1] and [2]. Possibly it's a problem with my browser (Firefox 1.0/Debian Linux) but I don't think so. Just wanted to point it out.

Dbenbenn 07:56, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, this is a known problem, I'm claiming a firm not-my-fault though. Some non-standards-compliant browsers (MSIE, mainly) put codepage Windows-1252 characters in what they send even though the english wikipedia is ISO-8859-1. When I edit this, my browser recognises they're invalid characters, and replaces them with ?'s so as not to send invalid data. They should be replaced with either html &name; character entities, or for "smart quotes" with just plain regular quotes. Feel free to leave a link on my talk page when this happens though, I'll fix them up. --fvw* 08:01, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Lesya Ukrainka

Heya, I happened to stumble across Lesya Ukrainka in the course of RC patrolling. Very nice, I think it deserves a . Keep up the good work! --fvw* 09:22, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Hey there.

Thanks for the comments on Lesya Ukrainka. I thought it was funny that I just started it, and already I've gotten a comment :-). Much appreciated. By the way ... what is RC patrolling?

RC patrolling is Special:Recentchanges patrolling. Those of us who have nothing interesting to write about patrol the list of recent changes to prevent bad information being inserted, and pretend to feel useful.

All chocolate chip cookie donations would be grately appreciated, but I should say it won't do well for my middle aged physique, which is declining at a rapid rate now that the Xmas holidays are getting closer (sigh).

I know how you feel, my early-twenties physique doesn't respond well either. Still, I'm dogmatically clinging on to the fact that alcohol dries out the skin and prevents acne and hoping this christmas will balance itsself out.

Xamian 09:41, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

--fvw* 09:52, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Hummingbird

A note I didn't feel like mentioning about that particular hummingbird. It is being held by a janitor at our school because it died, unfortunately. I had asked the janitor to hold it for me so I can get a good shot of it. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:29, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Stubs

Hi, I am sorry if I disturbed anything. I am trying to figure out how to get the {{Israel-stub}} (see Template:Israel-stub) to show up properly in the list of stubs with "images", instead of the "blank column" on the list of stubs at Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs#Place-related, By Region. Also I am trying to do the same for the {{Judaism-stub}} (Template:Judaism-stub) in the religious stubs at Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs#Religion, mythology, faiths, and beliefs , and {{Jewish-hist-stub}} (Template:JewHist-stub) at Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs#History). Since I created these three stubs, (they all have "images" with them), and they are being used, I would appreciate any help in getting them to appear in the Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs page. If you could help I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you.IZAK 09:32, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Israel Law links

I added the links to the specific pages of the Law translations - why just one link to the header? The title of the site is not specific enough. The translated laws are commercial laws and not just insurance laws. I beleave the deep links are better.

Thanks (Re: Copyright notices)

Thanks for the welcome & feedback. To address your points:

1 - Thanks, I'll remove the copyright notice on the Haystack Rock page (strike that... noticed you already did...)

2 - I licensed under the GFDL, and then added my own "requests" beneath. Consider the GFDL to be formal, and my typing underneath to be a request to the viewer. IMO, 'non-commercial use only' is fairly free, altho not strictly keeping with the GFDL. I've seen user statements "all over the map" on people's picture pages, including no indication at all of where the picture came from (i.e. blank).

3 - All the pictures I added are completely unique (i.e. I took them myself, if that's what you mean by unique?). jkl_sem 18:25, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Damn! You beat me again.

Keep up the good work fighting vandalism!—Trevor Caira 22:08, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, you too. Wikipedia is a wonderful community, but sometimes on RC patrol you realise Sartre was right: Hell is other Editors. --fvw* 22:12, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)

CSD etc

OK - thanks for pointing that out. And also thanks for pointing out <nowiki></nowiki> Jeff Knaggs 22:57, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Vanity

Look, do you really want to leave that nonsense up for five days? Vandalism is a speedy deletion category. Using this site as personal blog is vandalism. Please stop slapping my wrist every time I move to delete someone's misuse of Wikipedia. Thanks. - Lucky 6.9 23:14, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm going to continue slapping your wrist as long as you break the rules. I don't like the vanitycruft any more than you do, but that's no excuse to ignore policy. --fvw* 23:16, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)

Fvw, I know you mean well, but there's no need to use language that's likely to upset Lucky. I know sometimes the judgement call on CSD can be wrong (he's not perfect) but I've watched him and he's only trying to stop vandalism. I've asked him to remove your RFC though. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:10, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Heya, thanks for taking an interest. I always welcome suggestions on how to improve pleasant communication with other editors. What language are you talking about though? --fvw* 00:13, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

The "slapping your wrists" comment. It's liable to cause him to get him upset. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:15, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hmm? That was his comment, I merely used the same term. But perhaps it wasn't the best phrase to copy. --fvw* 00:16, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

• I'll ask you nicely: Please don't accuse me of breaking rules and please don't police my edits. I'm not the one who's breaking any rules or ignoring policy. It's the computer geeks who seemed to think they were worthy of an encyclopedia who are doing the rule-breaking. Thanks again. - Lucky 6.9 23:18, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• One more reversion and/or snide remark I'll put you on RfC immediately. - Lucky 6.9 23:23, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• • OK, you asked for it. - Lucky 6.9 23:35, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Per Tabu's request, I've withdrawn my RfC. I'd like to put this behind us and move on to more important tasks. - Lucky 6.9 00:58, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism Spree

Hi. Can't somebody just ban the IP? -- Curps 00:16, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be nice, note the desperate-measures banner I put at the top of S:RC. I wonder if wikipedia strips <blink> tags *evil grin*. --fvw* 00:19, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

That would be ironic... vandalising the vandalism in progress page with blink tags ;P You truly are evil! Incidently, block log says that Chris_O blocked him. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:26, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Asbestosis - Compensation and Liability Disputes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestosis_-_Compensation_and_Liability_Disputes

Significant revision in progress. Please consider re-evaluation.

A dose of random incomprehensibility

I'm not that lonely loser.--The_stuart 06:25, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't recall claiming you were that (what?) or any other lonely loser. In fact, I don't recall ever interacting with you on wikipedia, though my memory may be flawed as far as that last one goes. Care to explain? --fvw* 21:35, 2004 Dec 21 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. :) OvenFresh☺ 20:31, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I second that. Thanks for the laugh as well, especially after yesterday's unpleasantness. Best, - Lucky 6.9 00:14, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My archive of Netoholic RfC

Hi Fvw. Would you be willing to support me if Netoholic succeeds in getting the copy speedied or lists it on VfD? By the way, thanks for reverting Netoholic's <{{db}} notices. Vacuum c 02:12, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

I'll support your right to keep that RFC as a flat copy, yes. I'll vote against its deletion on VfD, and I'll keep removing speedy notices. Should the community decide to delete it on VfD I'll abide by that and expect you to do the same ofcourse.

However, in the interest of cooperation and not escalating matters and all that nonsense, have you considered putting it somewhere off wikipedia? Keep it somewhere on your computer or if you want to link it or show it to others, put it on a web host somewhere (heck, I'd be willing to host it somewhere if that'll stop this senseless bickering). Should you need it for wikipedia evidence later, you can always paste it back in at that point. I think you have a right to keep it in your user space, but I also think that all things considered it's not a wise choice. --fvw* 02:33, 2004 Dec 22 (UTC)

re: Notability as a reason to VfD

Your argument about the difficulties of organization are also true but many (me among them) don't consider it as strong a justification. 10,000 Warcraft articles would be very, very hard to organize but probably no harder than sorting out our conflicted opinions and divergent articles on, say, the 2004 elections.

I think the reason the "critical mass of editors" argument plays well is that it so clearly addresses new and probably transient cultural topics. I've seen it open the eyes of quite a few new editors when they realize that their pristine article, their "golden prose" may not yet be NPOV and, even if it is, must be protected from vandalism for all time. Many decide not to accept that obligation.

I'll admit, it's not an argument that I push if someone's being irrational. But it seems to work for new editors who want to make a serious contribution and who understand that our goal is to write an encyclopedia. Rossami (talk) 03:16, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Lonely Loser

Some one signed in using your name edited my user page. You can check the history and see.--The_stuart 18:55, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oh yes, so I did. The "he did make a point though" wasn't about the anon's claim that you were lonely though (I don't see the term loser anywhere), it was about the fact that you'd misspelt "Contributions", which I took the liberty of fixing up after reverting the vandalism. --fvw* 23:34, 2004 Dec 22 (UTC)

Please don't take the liberty to mess with my user page ever again please. Its mine and I can missspell whatever I please there. Thank you in advance.--The_stuart 17:59, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks mate :) My btrieve article is slowly but surely getting there... Ta bu shi da yu 04:24, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for correcting my slight omission of the beta version at Wikipedia:Announcements and for reverting vandalism to my user page. You caught it before I did! =D --Slowking Man 06:58, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

And more thanks

Thanks for the vandalism revert... and a merry Christmas! Man vyi 09:36, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Community Blog reference

I just competely rewrite the article - what is the problem now?

csd - console game

Please note Console game was not a candidate for speedy deletion. --fvw* 19:01, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

I think it falls under the category, a console game (describes typical gameplay, history, what to expect from a console game) is not a video game console (the actual hardware). If lumber did not exist and I pasted what was under tree into it, I think what would fall under no meaningful content - related, sure, but not what you're looking for.

I'm not arguing whether or not it should be deleted, I'm arguing it's not a speedy deletion candidate. Please read the page linked in my original comment, there are five strictly defined criteria for speedy deletion of redirects, this wasn't one of them. This sort of stuff should go on WP:RFD. --fvw* 11:25, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

You misunderstand my response, I'm arguing that it is a candidate under "No meaningful content or history". The redirect is an error, so it was removed - the article has no meaningful content or history. --Slike 11:29, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No meaningful content is not a criterion for speedy deletion for redirects. Also, note that "no meaningful content" refers to patent nonsense (read this "is not" list on this one, I think it'll clarify things), not "this is silly" or "this is stupid" things. --fvw* 11:33, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

Ah, serves me right for not reading your entire link before posting a response. My above comment stands as an explanation. I'll use the other page. Thank you --Slike 11:37, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with the eScrew mess.

That was one hectic event. You seem to have done quite a bit of work with this stuff on other occasions as well, so I hereby "award" you a WikiThanks. -- Kizor 12:39, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

stop unblanking my page

please

Timezones

I just used what was in the logs (GMT); I assumed it would be obvious. I suppose it won't hurt to specify, though. Noel (talk) 15:22, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't think you did, or at least if you did that would mean I wasn't at my exam this morning and that would be a shame as I think I did rather well. I warned at 13:07 and 13:13 GMT. --fvw* 15:25, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

Oh, wierd. The logs must be in local time, then. How odd. I thought signatures were local (so you could know whether the person was likely to be about to go off to bed, etc), and logs GMT (so we'd all be on the same temporal frame of reference for this kind of stuff), but it must be exactly the other way around. How useless! I'll fix my WP:AN entry, then. Noel (talk) 15:32, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, it is suboptimal. I've just set my timezone to UTC in my preferences, at least that way it's all consistent and cannonical. --fvw* 15:35, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

I'm immensely amused to see you using "suboptimal" in the canonical way (not to mention "canonical", to boot) - have you been reading the Jargon File? :-) Anyway, excellent idea on the time-zone - I've now done the same. Noel (talk) 16:37, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Nah, I just hang out in geeky crowds, the language rubs off on you. Anyway, I'm taking the night off RC patrol, I'm off to find me some egg nog or something. Have a Merry Christmas! --fvw* 17:48, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

Vacuum's subpage

Vacuum is using that page simply to harass me. I am shocked that you support such an activity. The RFC failed, that means it gets deleted. Why should I, the "victim" here, have to be the one that goes to great measures to ensure that a frivolous RFC gets deleted? Stop removing my notices. -- Netoholic @ 18:01, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

Yes, it was deleted, exactly as policy dictates. The content however is just another GFDL blob of data, which Vacuum is well within his rights to put in his user space. Also note that even if he shouldn't be allowed to keep the content, speedy deletion is not the way to go: It is not a CSD, so your CSD tags are inappropriate. Take it to WP:VFD if you must, even if you could get someone to speedy the page it'll just be recreated anyway. The wise thing to do would be just ignore it ofcourse, the people who care about the RfC know about it already anyway, and you're only drawing more attention to it by acting this way. --fvw* 17:05, 2004 Dec 26 (UTC)

Einstein's Catagories

Frank, Could we please leave Einstein in the Category physicists? The fact that is is a subcategory of some other category is - to me - less important then the fact that the category of physicists will be imcomplete without him (and without the other Nobel prize winners). If someone is browsing through the physicists category, they might not think (or want) to look for and check out related categories. If we drop out all of the physicists who appear in other sub-categories, there will not be much left in the physicists category, which will make it far less useful. Michael L. Kaufman 02:11, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I was working under the incorrect assumption that items should be as far down the category tree as possible (and only there), but after reading up there appear to be not guidelines or attempts at guidelines for what parent categories to include and not to include. I do feel the category bar becomes a bit cluttered like this, but I suppose it is better than having people not find einstein where they expect him. --fvw* 16:58, 2004 Dec 26 (UTC)

Blocking

Could you block me?

Signatures

Hi Fvw -

Heya. Have you seen Wikipedia:Username#Signatures? You're free to use images in your sig if you want to ofcourse, 
but it is perceived as unpleasant for some people

I hadn't seen that. I use my sig this way for a reason (the horse is how I sign my name when writing). I have made it a little smaller in the last few days bacuase I realised the length of the sig was a bit much. What I'd really like - and haven't found any way to do - is to use the image as the link to my talk page. If that were possible it would cut the size of the sig and keep my 'real signature' there. Grutness|^hello?

I don't think that's possible I'm afraid, for consistency's sake people are always taken to the image page when clicking on the image. I suppose you could turn the image page into a redirect to your talk page if you're the only one using it, but it's a bit of a hack. --fvw* 13:18, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

CSD#2

Hello. Since you disagreed that copyvio-blanked-by-author qualifies as a test page under the current CSD criteria, I wanted to explain my reasoning. I really think it does qualify according to current criteria. Here's why: Someone comes across Wikipedia for the first time. They see these notices that they can edit any page or even create an article. They're thinking "Can I really create a page here? Do they really let just anyone do that?" So they go to one of the last web pages they were looking at, or pull up one of their bookmarked pages or whatever. They copy that page, paste it into Wikipedia and click save. "What do you know? I really did just create an article." A minute or two later, or even an hour or two later, they realize what they did and then try to delete it -- only they can't. The only way they can see to get rid of it is to blank it. "Maybe that's all it takes to delete an article." The entire purpose of pasting the material from another website was to see if they really could create an article. When I see copyvio that was subsequently blanked by the author, without first being tagged as copyvio, I assume that is what happened. It makes no sense to post copyrighted material, then blank it, unless the purpose of the original post was a test. SWAdair | Talk 07:12, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but I'm afraid once you start trying to interpret "what they must have thought" as justifcation for speedy deletion it becomes a slippery slope. I'd be happy to have copy-of-webpage-followed-by-blanking become a CSD, but I'm not comfortable with "it must have been a test, because…" justifications. --fvw* 13:26, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

When do pages get deleted after the date of voting has passed?

I was going trough the random page button and came up with this page Fazed and as you can see in Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Fazed, it has been voted by all to DELETE, last vote 19th of december. When do paged listed on VTF get deleted after the tive of voting is passed? Theres no point having this page linger any longer than need be. Fledgeling 12:25, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Each entry on VfD that gets voted for deletion needs to get handled by an admin. Some backlog is to be expected here, especially in this festive season. The article is listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old until an admin deletes it. --fvw* 13:45, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

redirects

you mean I should not? because, it seems to work. But I do not care, of course, if it redirects to the top of the article. It barely survived VfD, and nothing will ever link to it anyway (it was created as a way to rewrite the Finno-Ugric article from a different pov, which is why I am so adamant about redirecting it). dab (ᛏ) 18:01, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Nope, I mean technically don't. They'll work when you're at the redirect page and click the link, but if you just click here you'll be redirected to the top of the page. This is just a technical consequence of the way mediawiki, http and html work. --fvw* 18:05, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)

that's right. sorry. but it doesn't matter, here. dab (ᛏ) 18:09, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate it -- I just thought that a Liger looked like an urban myth, but I'll check things out first in the future;) Take it easy:) Zantastik 20:29, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)