View text source at Wikipedia

User talk:28bytes/Archive 5

Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10


The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

DYK nomination of Rob Stone (actor)

Hello! Your submission of Rob Stone (actor) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for A-VCS-tec Challenge

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fly from Here

Materialscientist (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

And don't refactor my comments

Your comments threw mine out of whack since I was replying to both brownhairedgirl and Griswaldo.4meter4 (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind word. I too have seen you make excellent contributions at DYK. I'm sure we'll have more positive encounters in future. No hard feelings here at all. :-)4meter4 (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom

The AN/I thread agaisnt Noleander has been closed, and an ArbCom page opened. I just added my statement. I had no choice, and I never wanted this to be reduced to a conflict between me an Noleander. But I think I am a polarizing figure.

I think a key element is just to explain to people how to recognize anti-Semitic editing. You have made astute comments in the past and I hope you will follow this case. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I have been following the case and will continue to do so. 28bytes (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Gremlins (Atari 2600)

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

EFM

I would still very much like to have the user right as It would be useful to have the ability edit the actions of edit filters. Also just because I am not familiar with the technical talk I have repeatedly read the WP:FILTER more times than I can count. Jessy (SCG01) 23:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jessy. Honestly, this is not a user right you need. Most admins don't even have this right. Most of the filters are public, anyway, so if you're interested in learning about them you can. 28bytes (talk) 23:38, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
But he needs this right, because he's gotta catch 'em all! Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 11:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rob Stone (actor)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Jews and banking

Since you are the editor who nominated Economic history of the Jews for deletion, I would like to ask you to review the following draft articles and get your input as to their readiness to be moved into article mainspace. What I'm looking for, more than anything else, is a preliminary sense of whether you would be inclined to nominate any of these articles for deletion if they were to be moved into article mainspace. Assuming that you agreed that these articles were worthy to be kept, I would also like to ask for your suggestions for expanding and improving the article text as well as any suggestions for improving the article titles.

My take on Noleander's article is that the title Jews and money was extremely unfortunate, the title Economic history of the Jews was too broad a scope and that the specific revision authored by Noleander was composed in large part of a coatrack of antisemitic canards. However, I think that there are one or more legitimate article topics in Noleander's original text. (I also don't think that Noleander intended to be antisemitic; I think he just has a tendency to miss antisemitism in some of the sources and thus sometimes presents opinions as facts. I recognize that you have a different perspective but I don't think we need to agree in order to work together productively.)

In any event, I have been working on User:Pseudo-Richard/Jews and banking as one of the legitimate topics covered by Noleander's original disastrous attempt at an encyclopedic article. The section on the "19th century" is almost entirely Noleander's text as redacted by me to remove the most blatant issues.

I have also been working on User:Pseudo-Richard/History of Jews in American banking which focuses on the U.S. part of the story.

I would like to ask you to review the entire text of these proposed articles as well as critique the article title.

I think the judicious selection of article titles is almost as important as article text because titles change much less frequently than article text does and the article title implies a scope that strongly influences what text is added and deleted from the article.

I am not too thrilled with the title "Jews and banking" as it still sounds antisemitic to me. I'm playing with "History of Jews in banking" but I'm open to other suggestions.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Oh, and while I have your attention, I guess I should draw your attention to User:Pseudo-Richard/Role of Jews in the development of capitalism. My thesis here is that not all of the encyclopedic content from Noleander's first attempt at an article on this topic is directly related to banking and that "capitalism" is a broader topic that covers those points that are not really about "banking" per se. I have not worked on this page nearly as much as I have worked on the pages on banking. Still, I figured I'd ask you to take a look so as to get an early assessment from you as to the direction in which I am going. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. In general, my advice in such a situation would be to first seek out people with the most expertise in the topic areas of interest. For example, looking at the talk pages of Jewish history and Islamic economics in the world, the following WikiProjects are listed:
I have no idea how active those projects are, but if you are aiming to create an article analogous to Islamic economics in the world, some or all of those projects would seem to be a good place to request help in selecting the best secondary sources. There may be other interested projects, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject History.
One thing I would strongly recommend is to not proceed quickly or without broad input from editors with expertise in the subject areas. Buy-in from the projects listed above or other interested projects on the direction, focus and scope of the article(s) you intend to create or recreate will be key in avoiding the kind of mess that led to AN/I and ArbCom discussions. Please, proceed with care. That you are reaching out to other editors such as me and Slrubenstein is a good sign, and encourages me that you intend to build actual, encyclopedic articles on the topics instead of the racist propaganda that was thankfully deleted. Incidentally, I thought Slrubenstein's advice and suggestions on your talk page were quite sound, and I hope you'll take them into consideration. Best, 28bytes (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Smart watchlist

I have created a first cut at a smart watchlist. Please see User talk:UncleDouggie/smart watchlist.js. —UncleDouggie (talk) 08:50, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I will try this out. 28bytes (talk) 15:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform

Hi 28bytes/Archive 5. I have now moved the RfA reform and its associated pages to project space. The main page has been updated and streamlined. We now also have a new table on voter profiles. Please take a moment to check in and keep the pages on your watchlist. Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Pages watchlisted. 28bytes (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Edit test cleanup bot

The thread seems dead, it's not recent enough to be getting noticed anymore. I'd go out on a limb and say that you have clear enough consensus for the "Simple case" cleanup, and not enough for the "Complex case" cleanup. Personally, I'd think that after two months running simple case, if it all works out well, you'd be able to point to it and say "let's run a trial of option 1 of the complex case" and go from there. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

P.S. It's an excellent idea for a bot. Kudos.

Thanks Sven. The BAG was kind enough to approve the bot (simple task only) for a 50-edit trial based on the VP discussion, so I've started coding it and will hopefully be ready to test it soon. In addition to fixing the simple cases, it will write to a userspace subpage what it would have done with complex edits it comes across. That way we'll have some empirical data to go by if we want to revisit the question in the future.
Interestingly enough, I stumbled upon this dead bot the other day that used to do the exact same thing, but apparently the source was lost and the bot op is no longer active. I may use that bot's contribution history as a test case for my bot to see if it does the same thing when presented with the same edits. 28bytes (talk) 20:41, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Nintendo

I was looking at your page was wondered if you've played games on the NES. I loved the NES. –BuickCenturyDriver 01:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Please note that "Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and all discussion should ultimately be directed solely toward the improvement of the encyclopedia". Thanks. Guoguo12--Talk--  02:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
@Guoguo12: If you feel the need to scold BuickCenturyDriver, please do it on his talk page, not mine.
@BuickCenturyDriver: Interesting you should mention Nintendo. A goal of mine here is to get List of Atari 2600 games up to featured list status, and I've just been reading over featured list List of Nintendo 64 games for comparison to get some ideas on what needs to be done to accomplish that. But yes, I absolutely played NES back in the day, Super Mario Bros. mostly. Interesting how most of List of Nintendo Entertainment System games is blue-linked, but there are still tons of redlinks on the List of Atari 2600 games. I'm doing my part, though: at least now all nine of the launch titles and many of the more notable homebrews have articles. If I ever get done writing the missing 2600 articles (ha!) I may tackle some of the NES ones. 28bytes (talk) 02:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry. Guoguo12--Talk--  21:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
No worries. 28bytes (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The Video Game Critic

I have edited the "Controversy" section as you requested. It is very middle-of-the-road and informative. It is also cited very well. Please check the citations. Thank you! Kajicat (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)Kajicat

I do not understand. The sources I am citing are directly from The Video Game Critic himself, and from his actual website. Both sources are from "user-generated" sections of The Video Game Critic site, but one was officially authored by The Video Game Critic himself, while the other source had The Video Game Critic as a contributing author. Being the creator and author of that web domain, The Video Game Critic is a credentialed members of the sites' editorial staff. The Video Game Critic himself is making a claim about his reviews being possibly offensive and/or homophobic in nature and is asking his user base for their opinions. There is no questionable doubt over the authenticity of the source, as the claims are written directly by The Video Game Critic and found on The Video Game Critic's website. All sources I have provided directly support my writing, which is neutral. Would it be best if I do not put it under a "Controversy" section, but rather place it promptly within the correct time line under the "Reviews" section? Are my web citations incorrect? Please tell me what you think would be the best fit for my contribution to this article. Thank you very much and sorry for any misunderstandings. Kajicat (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)Kajicat

Re: Thanks

Thanks for the cleanup. Our friend has been indefinitely blocked by Floquenbeam. Keep up the good work. 28bytes (talk) 18:25, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Always glad to help :) Gscshoyru (talk) 18:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Sad Song

Sorry about that, i was on the library computers (like i am right now) and i only had 1 minute left!! But i will grab some sources in the next hour that i have left, take care!! MajorHawke (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Got the sources, now they need to be formatted correctly. take care!!MajorHawke (talk) 20:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Iunderstand you liked to be as wikipedia-type as possible but im just wondering from your personal opinion, do you think my choice of genres for cars songs are good?? Because i like to hear other peoples opinion. but i dont get much of that. I also understand you dont exactly find genres important, but other people do, 100's of different people look up songs every day at wikipedia and alot of them dont understand what type of website wikipedia is, and are expecting the genres to be true "all the time". Well if you find the time, please let me know some of your opinons, and btw, i got a new computer monitor. It's old, but my internet isnt, it's better then having to go to the library and only get an hour, take care!MajorHawke (talk) 03:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

genres

thanks for at least giving your opinion, take care! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MajorHawke (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It's been a few months...

You willing to run again? The only real issue with your last run was the length of time you had been active; obviously that's no longer an issue, and you've only broadened your horizons since then. --Dylan620 (I'm all ears) 03:15, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow, what a pleasant thing to see when I click the orange bar! :) I'm very honored and flattered, but I'd like to wait a little longer first. I'm sending you an e-mail that goes into a little more detail about that. Thanks! 28bytes (talk) 04:40, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

That RfA reform thing

Kudpung has asked me to 'nudge' some people .. as I'm an idle get, I'm just going through the entire Task Force list so my apologies if you didn't need a nudge! You can slap me about over on WP:EfD if you like :o) Straw polling various options: over here - please add views, agree with views, all that usual stuff. Pesky (talk) 12:45, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

ANI mention

I have mentioned you at WP:ANI, please see WP:ANI#User:Jasper Deng and COI. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup, I've been following along. Thanks for the heads-up. 28bytes (talk) 03:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
No problem, I just wasn't sure that if mentioning a user briefly called for notifying them about the discussion. Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:04, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Please see this if you're interested in mentoring. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Good luck... (you'll need it) Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring

I have agreed to mentoring after a short dialog with Kansan, and I would like you to be my mentor. See my talk page.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be happy to. I'll follow up with you in more detail on your talk page. 28bytes (talk) 05:24, 20 April 2011 (UTC)