User talk:MER-C/archives/22

Happy Editing! — 72.75.78.69 (talk · contribs) _{22:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)}

1) There's absolutely nothing stopping you.

2) Two comments:

2a) This seems a bit redundant to your standard maintenance tags.

2b) The various pages to be moved into project space contain a lot of redundancies and could easily be condensed into one page.

That said, given the massive backlogs in some of the categories (e.g. Category:All articles lacking sources has 91,111 members) it might be worth a shot. I've certainly been in the "is this deletable crap?" situation before and tagged {{notability}} for a second opinion, which has a multi-month backlog.

3) I really hope this doesn't get added to talk pages of the creators of bad faith articles. There are also a set of deletion warning templates for specific problems, e.g. Template:Db-bio-notice. (I personally don't believe in speedy deletion warnings because most of the articles I tag are irredeemable). I'm not sure where there is one for

I guess that's about it for now. MER-C 11:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thnx fer the feedback ... some of the duplication/redundancy is based on experience with newbies (say it on both the article's discussion page and the editor's talk page, because they might only see one of them at first) ... these are intended only for the "questionable" ones, and their intent is to slow down the

sd-copyvio

}} templates (applied after the fact) are sufficient. :-)

Happy Editing! — 72.75.78.69 (talk · contribs) _{17:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)}

Hi. I see that you reverted and warned 163.153.27.75 (talk · contribs) due to their vandalizing Conquistador; thanks. While I agree that the edit was inappropriate, since this appears to be the first edit they have ever made, did it really deserve a level 2 warning? --NERIC-Security (talk) 13:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't use level 1 warnings because I prefer not to make assumptions about the IP's intentions to contribute constructively, (the level 1 warnings make this implicit assumption). And besides, they say effectively say the same thing anyway. MER-C 11:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/20070616 Chris Young visits Wrigley (4).JPG

I was browsing around on the old FP promotions, and I saw that you had promoted this one. While fairly neutral on the discussion, I don't understand how a vote of three for and three against merits FP promotion. Was there some other circumstance that is not mentioned in the archive? Thanks

Clegs (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I have it at 7/2. Not every support or oppose comes in bold letters and one valid support was struck due to procedural reasons which were resolved. MER-C 06:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

IP User 90.196.3.1 (talk · contribs) seems to think my personal page is a discussion forums and keeps editiing my articles there and generally creating a bit of a mess there. I keep reverting but he doesn't stop. Other wiki users are getting tired of reverting his edits too on various Sikh articles. He seems to push a particular POV on Sikhism, one from a sect known as AKJ. Can you stop this guy or at least have a word with him.--Sikh-history (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Mmm, lots of SPAs. I suspect there might be some sort of

WP:ANI with some evidence of misbehaviour due to this underlying problem. MER-C

12:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You will also need to add [[Category:Wikipedians who use StatusBot]] to your userpage in order for SoxBot V to automatically update your online/offline status. If you do not added this text, you will always be listed as "offline" at HAU. Thanks. Useight (talk) 02:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi MER-C

Forgive me my ignorance as I am not completely familiar with the POTD circuitry here. I have a request, but I do not know if you are the right user to ask, but if not, maybe you can redirect me. June 21 is the national day of Greenland, and I thouhgt it would be good timing if the POTD on June 21 could be an FP from Greenland. What I had in mind is Image:Upernavik_evening_panorama_edit4.jpg and alternatively, if this is considered too newly nominated, Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg. If this is against some policy just tell me, and I'll forget about it. Cheers, and thank you for the nice work you do closing FPs. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't do POTDs, you should ask

Howcheng. MER-C

07:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you indicate whats wrong with this file? I have both viewed it full size and in a 50 and 250px thumbnail and can't find a problem. Is it because there is a sharpened version available? Viridae^Talk 08:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Meh don't worry - comments from Durova indicate that she (the uploader and only significant contributor) is happy for the deletion to occur anyway. Viridae^Talk 08:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Mer-C; I just inadvertenly edited a wikipedia contribution of yours whereby I only wanted to have the code for a wiki I am building. You reverted it after this. Thanks & have a nice week-end. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.64.224.244 (talk • contribs)

Yeah, that's fine. Just try to avoid doing it in the future by closing the window/tab without saving. MER-C 10:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if you'd comment

I'd appreciate it if you didn't spam my talk page every time you file a COIN report. I go there twice a day and whether I comment or not is up to me. Thanks. MER-C 07:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

hi,

why do you delete my post in a articel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Topper nclub (talk • contribs)

Which article? You should also read the (big/bold) text at the top of this page. MER-C 13:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

sorry, but im a newbie from germany. article : Peter North (porn actor)

it was a extern link to a database-site (link www.iafd.com or www.adultfilmdatabase.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Topper nclub (talk • contribs)

Your contributions are empty, so I can only guess it was adultstarbase.com (tracking URL). I suppose you added the links to the German wiki too (it was the same IP address). That's highly suspicious and screams SPAM! to me. There's a definition of spam in that (bold) text above. MER-C 09:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I'm a newbie, not a spammer, and would like to add an external link to the "x year in music" Wikipedia pages. The WP:EL suggests that "if the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let the Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it". So here we are, the link is http://www.getback.com/Music/@1982. You can listen to over 1,000 songs from 1982. It's fun, compelling, relevant and informative. Not to mention free and registration not required. Also, the copyrighted material has been cleared for use on the site. Thanks for your help with this. Angelica Angelczek (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Pardon my cynicism, but why does this post sound like a promo for the site? Instead, you should prove it has some sort of encyclopedic use, say, as a reference. It might also help your case if you contributed in other ways than linking to that site. MER-C 12:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Clearly it does have encyclopedic use. It's an interactive reference where you have the ability to transport yourself into x year and listen to the songs spanning all genres of that year. I've always been one to learn from experience in addition to reading and studying.

The internet lacks premium content, this link fills the void and creates a compelling wiki page for visitors. No other site offers three decades of music, is year specific, and free. Ideally it would be great if we could just pop a widget into the wikipedia page however it is copywrited material; that's for the wiki business development people to work out ;) Angelica Angelczek (talk) 17:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

By "reference", I meant an in-text citation of a

verify something stated in the article, for example "Avalanches have been caught in action on Mars. ^[1]". In this case, the site belongs to the (university) guys who operate the camera. To get a good appreciation of which sites qualify as reliable sources, you need to have some content experience (i.e. not just adding external links to one website). MER-C

13:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

76.79.110.130 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
--Hu12 (talk) 14:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

hmmmm I'm seeing links to IMDB, Music Brains, Rotten Tomatoes, Box Office Mojo, Star Pulse, and Myspace. Getback is offering more meaningful content than these sites. You can look up any artist and it lists their entire discography including international releases and bsides, as well as album artwork, videos and photos. The site is a unique resource, it's informative, relevant, contains information from knowledgeable sources (the VP of content co-produced "In The Name of Love: Africa Celebrates U2", his previous production work is Grammy nominated, and he's on the board of the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame), and it contains copyrighted material ie music, videos, and photos which can't be posted in the wiki page itself. How can we make this work while sticking to the guidelines? Angelica Angelczek (talk) 00:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

You can make it work by making useful contributions that are not adding links to getback.com (tracking link). You could, for instance, expand some of these articles. By the way, you still sound like you're spruiking the site. MER-C 11:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I noticed most of these articles are sports related. We have every sports statistic from 1968-1990 which we paid for. Why should we make it free and available when you want to take down our other contributions which we also paid for? How do you resolve this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelczek (talk • contribs)

(reset) You're missing the point: the idea is to contribute to the encyclopedia without adding links to your site which is

The instructions are here. It should be working. MER-C 12:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello there.. Can you explain why you tagged Image:La Comédie humaine 02.jpg for speedy-delete? The edit summary says "empty description page", but the Commons page clearly has a description. I don't really mind if the image is deleted, since it's not used anywhere (and probably won't be; there are other, better images of the same books available). But I'd just like to know what the problem is with the image. Thanks! – Scartol • Tok 14:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's the local description page that is relevant here, which we can use to add tags en.wikipedia specific tags (such as {{

FeaturedPicture}}). MER-C

12:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I warn a persistent vandal, leave for a few days of exams, and see what happens? Thanks for keeping an eye out, I appreciate it. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 19:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL, your getting hit by the vandals worse than i am, have you ever thought of semi page protection?

My userpage is permanently semi-protected and move-protected, this page is not. I need it unprotected because I move this page for archiving. MER-C 12:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You do a great deal of work, and for this you are slapped in the face by anon users vandalising your user page and yet you still help. Thankyou for defending my user page, you deserve this your efforts are greatly appreciated talk ) 03:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, though I'm used to it. :) MER-C 12:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi MER-C. You've got a page move script haven't you? Can you help with [2]. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no I don't, though I've had a lot of practice. I can also reasonably write one, consider it on my lengthy to-do list. I also just found out that I'm subject to the move throttle (dammit).

I think that's all of them done, give or take a few that didn't have revert links. MER-C 12:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. You clearly have had a lot of practice - I thought you definitely used a script! I think VoA has one somewhere. There's a note at the bottom of WP:AN about this. Thanks again. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Usurpation completed on fr.wp. Regards,

Thanks. :) MER-C 07:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikinews. Here is a short introduction to our policies that are substantially different from the Wikipedia versions.

• n:Wikinews:Cite sources - we cite sources in a different way to Wikipedia
• n:Wikinews:Writing an article - an introduction to writing an article
• n:Wikinews:Style guide - on headlines and other things.
• Wikinews:Archiving - we don't edit article after they have been published for two days.
• Wikinews:Original reporting - Wikinews allows OR

See your Wikinews talk page for a full welcome message,

Anonymous101 (talk) 09:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi,MER-C, May I please ask you, if a video clip might be nominated as a candidate for FP? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. MER-C 08:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Your user ID is ironic, as you show spammers no mer-c. I am fairly much death on spam also, as some of my more "controversial" posts in ANI suggest. I like your H-bomb. It's a similar idea to that expressed in the Vandalism selection on my user page. I would have said "spam" in the edit summary for Chartres rather than just reverting it; in fact I tried to, but you beat me to it. :) However, spammers usually know that they're spamming, though sometimes not. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The idea is to use the automated tools to 1) save you time and 2) get the message across that we can revert your spam extremely quickly and thus it wasn't worth your while spamming in the first place. Consider this guy - it took five spam campaigns (three as IPs) and about a year's worth of edit warring to get his links onto the 'pedia and it took me a minute to nuke the majority of it. (See WikiProject Spam report). The pun is unintended. MER-C 13:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe unintended, but it works. I usually use the rollback for obvious vandalism, i.e. what I call putting "stupid stuff" into articles, like vulgarities or the guy's own name or whatever; but I expect that obvious spam could be treated the same way. I am interested in your take on the Peter Wall article, i.e. whether you think I'm overstating it by calling it a spam article. Meanwhile, be careful about reverting that one guy, because he's threatening to contact "wikipedia abuse support", whatever that might be. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Support in abusing Wikipedia? Also, spamming and link vandalism are listed as types of vandalism on WP:(. MER-C 07:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate it's not your place to do it, but could you possibly check that the table I put on the page is the right type of thing? I'm not very good with images. If not don't worry :) steveking89 19:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

By replaceability it refers to our ability to replace it with a freely licensed image. Otherwise it's good, but one suggestion - it would be good if you linked to the interview mentioned. Also, each separate use requires it's own rationale but I have taken care of this. MER-C 06:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I have two questions for you. Where does it say that FPC Nominations get closed and removed within hours? And the process that closes such nominations protects or maintains who or what? I ask this because the only reasons that I can see to do that would be because the wiki is being used for very very wrong things.

That was more than two questions, but here is the other: What is the Picture of the Day today? I know what I see here, but I am very curious what others see.

It does start to have the appearance of a closed system here; an appearance that only gets stronger and stronger in resolution and focus; a closed and an abusive system. -- carol (talk) 12:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

We have a

featured picture criteria. In the case of the VI seal, the problem was it couldn't add value to an article (the image itself, not the commons VI process). Essentially it's a more discreet version of {{FPX}} on commons. It probably deserves a mention in the destructions

somewhere, I'll think about where it fits in tomorrow (sleep beckons).

Secondly, the process doesn't maintain anything. I maintain the process because I close the vast majority of nominations (for example in May I closed 72% see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/May-2008).

POTD: can you rephrase the question? I don't quite get what you're asking. (reference) MER-C 14:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I really thought that a secure review system could allow a new one to be mentioned there for a while; I am kind of old and tired of claiming that it is the insecurity of others that tends to make systems that are so exclusive. It is boring and for as many years as I have been doing that, the world must have surely devolved to a state that -- blah blah blah. However, to compare the amount of time it took to remove the photoshop advertisement from the article GIMP with how long it took the FPC thing to remove a mention of a different review system on a supportive wiki and you might see a little of what some of my problem with the removal was. If something wrong is going on, that should perhaps simply be mentioned.

Can you tell me what the Picture of the Day is today? I have a screengrab of what is being displayed on the Main Page that I view. I am finding it interesting and belief defying that users here do not know what is on it or are unwilling to say what is on it. I simply want to know if you see what I see, and then some input from you as to the reason others are not answering or are unable to answer that question. -- carol (talk) 14:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Today's picture of the day is this (snappy template form) or image form (doesn't update). MER-C 07:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the link, however, that does not mean that you and I both saw the same image. They split out the different parts of the software which run the display and when I built it and started to run the different pieces of it before the whole thing was completed -- the different stratification type layers of software build up made an impression on me.

In addition to that, I use a lot of software that is prebuilt but most of the gui software I build myself. No automated updates either -- so when that software starts behaving differently when preferences have not been changed and nothing has been updated by me, I start to look at where I am vulnerable. The answer lately is wikipedia admin, in addition to the people I do not know who are now involved with the toolkit and such in the project that I have no idea what I did that was wrong to them....

I do not like to see problems between the information wikis and the image server wiki -- they should be on the same team.

This has been an apology, I don't know if I did anything that I should apologize for and I don't know if you should be the recipient of it if I should apologize.

I saw a very adorable Lion fish in an aquarium (the POTD). I had an aquarium for a while and it was kind of fun but a lot of responsibility. Heh, I will close this apology with something 'deep': Aquarium fishes should not be put into shallow water. -- carol (talk) 07:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi MER-C. I saw that you tagged that image for speedy-deletion because there's no description. Isn't the summary seciton towards the bottom of the page good enough? Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 12:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It had no description on the English Wikipedia (the place where you put the {{FPC}} tag). The commons image/page will be unaffected by the deletion. MER-C 12:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, I see. Alright, thanks for clearing it up. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 12:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)