User talk:Mono/Archive 12

Hi Mono. Not to be a bother, but I would like to ask that you change the (complain) links in your edit summaries to something less offensive-sounding (eg. "discuss" or something). I'm not particularly upset by it, but new users looking for help could be turned off. Thanks in advance, Juliancolton (talk) 18:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to second this statement. A complain button is not a good thing to include in your edit summaries. ~

NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 18:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Done. It may show up as complain for a little while due to caching. mono 19:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mono, this is just a minor problem, but it currently reads "Edit summary( Discuss)", when it shoudl be "Edit sy=ummary (Discuss)". (Spacing) I do apologise if I sound like I'm nagging. Brambleclawx 22:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

llI yrt to ifx ti laetr. mono 22:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure I can! I assume by your sig that you would like the colors to be red, gold, and purple? I will try to make a logo that matches your current page. Ill whip one up, and let you see it. Please tell me if you want changes.

Cheers,

--Wyatt915✍ 22:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be good! Thanks, mono 22:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add some links to Marriage. I would like you to take a look at this first. I found this website in the internet. http://nomarriage.flippertv.com/No%20Marriage.pdf http://nomarriage.flippertv.com/Fire%20Your%20Wife.pdf http://nomarriage.flippertv.com http://www.nomarriage.com --Marriageamericanwomen (talk) 23:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See

this page.mono 23:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Your site seems to fall under

WP:ELN. mono

23:57, 4 June 2010 (

Maybe you should leave a talkback for the asking user. Brambleclawx 00:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template junk

Who has been helped? The help me template is for you to use, Mono, if you need help from other users. No one helped you an we don't know yet if you have helped

@jc: I created the template! You'd think I'd know how to use it... mono 00:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused... where did the template come from? Was it inserted by you, or was it inserted by the sking user? Brambleclawx 00:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The asking user inserted the template; I replaced it with the "helped" template after helping the user. mono 00:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) mono 00:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, bcx. mono 00:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not. mono 01:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TeleCom, I honestly think Mono was trying to help you. I know I was. That's not editcountitis. It is actually a policy and users do actually get in trouble for

myspacing. I don't think your case is nearly as bad as most, but it's something worth considering. We are here (or supposed to be) for building an encyclopedia, not making the best userpage. (That was not dissing userpages {I happen to like mine}, but an example) PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 01:38, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I find it helpful to recieve "steering" and reminders of why we're here. pol seems to have stated what I meant; I didn't really even mention your edit count; it is a quick and cruel way to measure contribs. Since you are "clueless" (as you said on your talkpage), and haven't read the policies, let me guide you towards

adoption. Essentially, it's mentoring from an experienced editor, which is really helpful for new users. I know you're just learning the ropes; I've noticed new users tend to be rather myspacey. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia! Good luck, mono 02:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Dear Mono:
I just wanted to thank you thank you for responding to my questions about PJTF in April. I went back today to closely re-read my talk page, and realized that in fact you had answered the questions under my "Additional Questions" header that I originally thought PrincessofLlyr had answered. In fact, I thought that your only response to me was "woof!" in response to the final question I asked (which should explain why I re-contacted you about answering questions shortly before your retirement- a rather dumb-a**, naively posed but well-intended request.) Sorry about not realizing this earlier!!! And thanks again for your helpfulness:)
loafysam (talk) 02:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're not dumb. I'm glad I could be of help;

research is very interesting. Anyway, if you need anything else just let me know. :p, mono 02:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks Mono! If you do like researchers I hope you don't mind answering a few more questions I have about PJTF, specifically about your role in it.

mono 19:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Do you mind? I would say too that the "requirements" might discourage users who are really just fans. That's the difference between us, we're editors first and fans second. They're fans first. That's just my take. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 20:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I meant. Btw, pol, you don't have to use {{

tps}} for me; just jump in. mono 20:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Please don't move a WP Report interview for someone else unless the report is overdue and you know the editor has disappeared. The interview for WP Comedy hasn't been closed yet and I still have all weekend to get it ready for publication. Furthermore, your note about the proposed redesign is a tad long-winded and downright condescending. The WP Report is a team effort, which doesn't sit well with the phrases "My goal is to modernize the way we report" and "I'd like to thank all the interviewers and interviewees." If I remember correctly, you rage quit on the Report after Pretzels and I wouldn't let you rearrange the WikiProject Desk to your liking. You've only conducted interviews for two articles and I ended up having to write both intros for you (one of those interviews I published after you quit and briefly "retired" from Wikipedia). You like to add boxes, templates, and pictures to everything, but what we really need more than anything else are editors who want to write articles. -Mabeenot (talk) 05:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. mono 19:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied here. Connormah (talk | contribs) 20:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Connormah (talk | contribs) 20:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mono. I think you may be mistaken. Was it someone else? If not, can you give me the diff? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 00:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I originally wrote it to the one who requested the interview. However, could you head over to the interview page and perhaps answer some questions? Cheers, mono 00:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mono, please calm down. Don't issue a level four if the user is testing, and hasn't been told about the sandbox before. Brambleclawx 02:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly just testing, right?--mono 02:23, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not testing, but not a level 4 offense. —fetch·comms 02:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I gave that edit a 3 and they vanded/tested again, so I jumped to a 4. We can count, right? mono 02:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Mono, I like your no-nonsense approach to dealing with vandals, but seeing as all of the user's previous edits were self-reverted, they would likely have reverted it quickly. I know those were offensive comments, and I know I should've studied their contribs more carefully before welcoming, but I think issuing a level 4, then notifying them of a sandbox doesn't make sense. To sum it up, I just think it would've been better to mention the sandbox first. I admit my own fault in not checking their contribs, but I feel from their edit pattern that a lesser warning would have sufficed. That's my opinion, you're entitled to yours. I'm just expressing what I think. Brambleclawx 02:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Give them a few minutes after the warning. You added those warnings so quickly after each other that you conflicted me thrice. Brambleclawx 02:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Uh. They're self-reverting multiple times, so issue them a self-revert notice. Then if they keep doing it anyway, issue a 3/4. —fetch·comms 02:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mono, I think you're going along the lines of

BITE-y to go straight to level four for the diff you mentioned above. Airplaneman ✈ 03:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I did not issue a level 4 warning initially. I issued a level 3 warning, then issued a level 4 warning after another bit of vandalism. monosock 03:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the CSD template rationale carefully, they are narrowly defined. Recently, you have been using CSD:U2 as a rationale for deleting userpages of IP users, however, CSD:U2 clearly states "User pages of users that do not exist (check Special:Listusers), except userpages for anonymous users who have edited, redirects from misspellings of an established user's userpage, and for the previous name of a recently renamed user (which should normally be left as a redirect to the new name for a reasonable time)."(bold mine) Anon users with static IP addresses are allowed to maintain their own userpages just as registerred users are. The CSD:U2 is only really for userpages for which no username exists. --Jayron32 04:57, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making me aware of that. It is not often that you see IP addresses maintaining userpages; I'd never seen one before today. Cheers, mono 05:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, it does not often happen, but it is not specifically dissallowed under any Wikipedia rules. There are some users that are vehemently against registering an account, and it is within their rights to not do so. Anyhoo, keep up the good work, just be a tad more careful when using the CSD templates. --Jayron32 05:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. monosock 17:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any room to mention to

Sure! I knew we had those, however, I forgot to include that. monosock 17:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Lead needs to be expanded
• Rename "Overview" section to something else. "Overview" is too generic for a section name. The entire article is technically a summary/overview of the topic.
• "Technical problems" seems too bias a section name. Try renaming to something else; perhaps under a "Reception" section. Public reviews can also go there, both positive and negative.
• The sections with the big tables and graphs should be the bottom sections (that's my own opinion), right before "See also", since they take the longest to scroll over. The more compact text sections should go before those.

Thank you. mono 21:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding to a couple of questions on the

However, I'm going to be a blunt here - your last two answers weren't particularly helpful, in my opinion! Let me explain why I say that (and please don't take this as criticism, it's meant to be helpful advice for the future!)

1. Wikipedia:Help desk#File:Ye Htoon.jpg: the question was about why using PNG would be preferable to using a JPG for a photograph. You used the {{HD/fix|page}} template - but I feel that saying that the user could edit it didn't answer the query. To be honest, I don't know the answer to the user's question (I've not looked into it), but they probably can't create a PNG image! I would also guess that Nyttend might also be a bit miffed to be templated, considering that they are an admin with almost 140K edits over the last 3-1/2 years!
2. WP:RFPP
   .

Again, this is not meant to be critical - I just thought I'd let you know what I was thinking - YMMV! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)On the first message, my intended meaning was since (as far as I could see) there was no need for the template. Therefore, my point was that "since it was incorrect, you can fix it by editing." On the second question, I began with an explanation of why pages are protected, then my intended point was "if there is misinformation, you can fix it by editing." I'll be more clear about my messages in the future. Smiles, mono 20:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mono, what happened to

WP:DTTR for the umpteenth time? :( For instance, I usually reserve template message use only for welcoming and vandals. And I left a couple suggestions for MacBook Air a few weeks ago that you could still work on, Airplaneman ✈ 20:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't need talkback messages from you because iStalk your talk page :) Airplaneman ✈ 20:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ever see User_talk:Mono/Archive_12#Warnings? mono 20:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Didn't feel like dragging on the issue, but since you brought it up again, I think a level three was still too strong. I would have done a level one, maybe two, and then skip to three or four if they continued. About MBA again - Note 3 says "The Adamo is 9987.99mm thick", which I highly doubt. Probably a vandal's work. I'm doing some work on the tech specs table right now. The lead needs expansion, but I think you should worry about it after filling out the rest of the article, most notably the reception section, so you can have a summary of the rest of the article in the intro. Airplaneman ✈ 21:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

←Likely subtle vandalism... mono 21:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you declined my requests to redirect BDAV (container format) and BDAV MPEG-2 Transport Stream to .m2ts article. You wrote: The title you suggested seems unlikely. Could you provide a source showing that it is a commonly used alternate name? Try BDAV instead.

Your suggested redirection BDAV -> m2ts is wrong. The term "BDAV" is also used for one of two common Blu-ray video disc formats. But it is also used for the BDAV container format.

I already provided a source showing that it is a commonly used alternate name:

• the official Blu-ray specification - http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/Downloadablefile/BD-ROM-AV-WhitePaper_100604%281%29-15916.pdf
• glossary of AfterDawn.com - http://www.afterdawn.com/glossary/term.cfm/bdav

Here are more references:

• http://www.file-extensions.org/m2ts-file-extension
• http://filext.com/file-extension/M2TS
• http://www.fileinfo.com/extension/m2ts
• http://www.videohelp.com/hd
• http://www.videohelp.com/glossary?M#M2T,%20m2ts,%20mts
• http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Assets/Downloadablefile/2b_bdrom_audiovisualapplication_0305-12955-15269.pdf
• http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Assets/Downloadablefile/bdj_gem_application_definition-15496.pdf

--89.173.66.229 (talk) 05:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My rationale was "most people won't look for BDAV (container format), rather they'd want to find a redirect at

DISAMB page at Wikipedia:Article_wizard/Disambiguation. Thanks, mono 05:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for answer. I will try to create a disambiguation page, but I will also try to create the same redirection through redirects for creation.--89.173.66.229 (talk) 06:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to

Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants

We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is

Two of last year's final 8,

Oh bot, please archive this. mono 17:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much to all who helped with the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive . We were very close to meeting our target of 7,500 articles remaining in the backlog. Our most shining success is the incredible reduction in the backlog of Special Requests. That part of the project saw a drop from 62 articles in the queue, some dating back to February of 2009, down to a stunning THREE, all of which were being edited at the close of the drive. The Special Requests page will now be a great resource for people looking to tidy up their article in advance of a GA or FA nomination, instead of a place where articles go to die. Moving forward The drive has not only forced a great leap forward in reducing the backlog. It has helped promote the Guild, and led to a greater awareness of the level of vigilance required to keep the backlog manageable. Ideas such as charts, graphs, and barnstars helped motivate editors, and meeting other users helped quell any feelings gnomish editors may have had in the past that they were toiling all alone. Keep up the good work people!! Stats Almost everyone who participated will receive a barnstar. We will be handing these out over the next week or so. Five people will receive the highest award for word count (80,000 or more), the Most Excellent Order of the Caretaker's Star: Bullock, Diannaa, NielsenGW, S Masters, and Torchiest. The Order of the Superior Scribe (40,000+) goes to Auntieruth55, Bobnorwal, Kojozone, Lfstevens, and Mlpearc. fds wins the Modern Guild of Copy Editors Barnstar (30,000+). The Old School League of Copyeditors Barnstar for 20,000+ is awarded to A. Parrot, mono, Truthkeeper88, and The Utahraptor. the Tireless Conributor Barnstar (12,000+) goes to dtgriffith, Laurinavicius, and Quinxorin. Buggie111, Brickie, cymru lass, liquidluck, noraft, and Yellow Monkey get the Cleanup Barnstar for 8,000+ words. The Working Man's Barnstar for 4,000+ words goes to Annalise and fetchcomms. The Modest Barnstar is awarded to Theo10011 and The Tito. Gold Star Award The Gold Star Award goes to the top editor in three challenges: Number of special requests fulfilled, number of articles edited, and number of words. Here are the final results. Final results: Gold Star Award: Requests Articles Words 1. SMasters (17) Torchiest (250) NielsenGW (150,360) 2. Bobnorwal (13) Diannaa (212) Diannaa (136,200) 3. Bullock (9) kojozone (76) Torchiest (125,000) Coordinator: ɳorɑfʈ Talk! Co-coordinators: Diannaa TALK and S Masters (talk)

Oh bot, thank you. mono 17:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]